↓ Skip to main content

Translating evidence-based interventions for implementation: Experiences from Project HEAL in African American churches

Overview of attention for article published in Implementation Science, May 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
41 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
97 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Translating evidence-based interventions for implementation: Experiences from Project HEAL in African American churches
Published in
Implementation Science, May 2014
DOI 10.1186/1748-5908-9-66
Pubmed ID
Authors

Cheryl L Holt, Erin K Tagai, Mary Ann Scheirer, Sherie Lou Z Santos, Janice Bowie, Muhiuddin Haider, Jimmie L Slade, Min Qi Wang, Tony Whitehead

Abstract

Community-based approaches have been increasing in the effort to raise awareness and early detection for cancer and other chronic disease. However, many times, such interventions are tested in randomized trials, become evidence-based, and then fail to reach further use in the community. Project HEAL (Health through Early Awareness and Learning) is an implementation trial that aims to compare two strategies of implementing evidence-based cancer communication interventions in African American faith-based organizations.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 97 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 97 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 20 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 20%
Student > Bachelor 10 10%
Researcher 9 9%
Student > Postgraduate 6 6%
Other 17 18%
Unknown 16 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 18 19%
Nursing and Health Professions 17 18%
Social Sciences 16 16%
Psychology 13 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 4%
Other 9 9%
Unknown 20 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 June 2014.
All research outputs
#8,533,995
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Implementation Science
#1,319
of 1,809 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#79,467
of 241,013 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Implementation Science
#29
of 41 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,809 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.9. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 241,013 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 41 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.