↓ Skip to main content

A systematic review of how studies describe educational interventions for evidence-based practice: stage 1 of the development of a reporting guideline

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Education, July 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
33 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
113 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
A systematic review of how studies describe educational interventions for evidence-based practice: stage 1 of the development of a reporting guideline
Published in
BMC Medical Education, July 2014
DOI 10.1186/1472-6920-14-152
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anna C Phillips, Lucy K Lewis, Maureen P McEvoy, James Galipeau, Paul Glasziou, Marilyn Hammick, David Moher, Julie K Tilson, Marie T Williams

Abstract

The aim of this systematic review was to identify which information is included when reporting educational interventions used to facilitate foundational skills and knowledge of evidence-based practice (EBP) training for health professionals. This systematic review comprised the first stage in the three stage development process for a reporting guideline for educational interventions for EBP.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 113 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 111 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 17 15%
Student > Master 15 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 12%
Librarian 7 6%
Other 7 6%
Other 30 27%
Unknown 24 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 31 27%
Nursing and Health Professions 15 13%
Psychology 11 10%
Social Sciences 10 9%
Environmental Science 4 4%
Other 17 15%
Unknown 25 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 13 August 2014.
All research outputs
#14,198,017
of 22,758,963 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Education
#1,952
of 3,305 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#118,256
of 228,866 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Education
#43
of 62 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,758,963 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,305 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% 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 228,866 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 62 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.