↓ Skip to main content

A Delphi survey to determine how educational interventions for evidence-based practice should be reported: Stage 2 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
3 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
62 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
A Delphi survey to determine how educational interventions for evidence-based practice should be reported: Stage 2 of the development of a reporting guideline
Published in
BMC Medical Education, July 2014
DOI 10.1186/1472-6920-14-159
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

Undertaking a Delphi exercise is recommended during the second stage in the development process for a reporting guideline. To continue the development for the Guideline for Reporting Evidence-based practice Educational interventions and Teaching (GREET) a Delphi survey was undertaken to determine the consensus opinion of researchers, journal editors and educators in evidence-based practice (EBP) regarding the information items that should be reported when describing an educational intervention for EBP.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 62 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 3%
Canada 1 2%
Unknown 59 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 15%
Researcher 8 13%
Other 7 11%
Student > Master 5 8%
Other 17 27%
Unknown 7 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 34%
Nursing and Health Professions 14 23%
Social Sciences 5 8%
Psychology 3 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 3%
Other 10 16%
Unknown 7 11%

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 06 August 2014.
All research outputs
#7,480,254
of 12,409,138 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Education
#1,129
of 1,732 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#91,968
of 194,308 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Education
#2
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,409,138 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,732 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.1. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% 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 194,308 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.