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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Understanding uptake of continuous quality improvement in Indigenous primary health care: lessons from a multi-site case study of the Audit and Best Practice for Chronic Disease project
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Implementation Science, March 2010
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1748-5908-5-21 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Karen L Gardner, Michelle Dowden, Samantha Togni, Ross Bailie |
| Abstract |
Experimentation with continuous quality improvement (CQI) processes is well underway in Indigenous Australian primary health care. To date, little research into how health organizations take up, support, and embed these complex innovations is available on which services can draw to inform implementation. In this paper, we examine the practices and processes in the policy and organisational contexts, and aim to explore the ways in which they interact to support and/or hinder services' participation in a large scale Indigenous primary health care CQI program. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 138 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 3 | 2% |
| Australia | 2 | 1% |
| Brazil | 2 | 1% |
| Canada | 2 | 1% |
| United States | 2 | 1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 126 | 91% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 26 | 19% |
| Researcher | 25 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 21 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 6% |
| Other | 7 | 5% |
| Other | 26 | 19% |
| Unknown | 25 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 31 | 22% |
| Social Sciences | 23 | 17% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 16 | 12% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 12 | 9% |
| Engineering | 7 | 5% |
| Other | 18 | 13% |
| Unknown | 31 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 29 September 2015.
All research outputs
#15,320,094
of 22,786,087 outputs
Outputs from Implementation Science
#1,556
of 1,721 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#76,722
of 93,852 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Implementation Science
#9
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,786,087 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,721 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.7. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% 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 93,852 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.