↓ Skip to main content

Digital storytelling as a method in health research: a systematic review protocol

Overview of attention for article published in Systematic Reviews, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
22 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
162 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
Digital storytelling as a method in health research: a systematic review protocol
Published in
Systematic Reviews, March 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13643-018-0704-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kendra L. Rieger, Christina H. West, Amanda Kenny, Rishma Chooniedass, Lisa Demczuk, Kim M. Mitchell, Joanne Chateau, Shannon D. Scott

Abstract

Digital storytelling is an arts-based research method with potential to elucidate complex narratives in a compelling manner, increase participant engagement, and enhance the meaning of research findings. This method involves the creation of a 3- to 5-min video that integrates multimedia materials including photos, participant voices, drawings, and music. Given the significant potential of digital storytelling to meaningfully capture and share participants' lived experiences, a systematic review of its use in healthcare research is crucial to develop an in-depth understanding of how researchers have used this method, with an aim to refine and further inform future iterations of its use. We aim to identify and synthesize evidence on the use, impact, and ethical considerations of using digital storytelling in health research. The review questions are as follows: (1) What is known about the purpose, definition, use (processes), and contexts of digital storytelling as part of the research process in health research? (2) What impact does digital storytelling have upon the research process, knowledge development, and healthcare practice? (3) What are the key ethical considerations when using digital storytelling within qualitative, quantitative, and mixed method research studies? Key databases and the grey literature will be searched from 1990 to the present for qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods studies that utilized digital storytelling as part of the research process. Two independent reviewers will screen and critically appraise relevant articles with established quality appraisal tools. We will extract narrative data from all studies with a standardized data extraction form and conduct a thematic analysis of the data. To facilitate innovative dissemination through social media, we will develop a visual infographic and three digital stories to illustrate the review findings, as well as methodological and ethical implications. In collaboration with national and international experts in digital storytelling, we will synthesize key evidence about digital storytelling that is critical to the development of methodological and ethical expertise about arts-based research methods. We will also develop recommendations for incorporating digital storytelling in a meaningful and ethical manner into the research process. PROSPERO registry number CRD42017068002 .

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 22 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 162 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 162 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 15%
Researcher 21 13%
Student > Master 17 10%
Student > Bachelor 14 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 7%
Other 35 22%
Unknown 39 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 27 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 21 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 17 10%
Arts and Humanities 13 8%
Computer Science 11 7%
Other 31 19%
Unknown 42 26%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 21. 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 December 2020.
All research outputs
#1,239,154
of 18,896,657 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Reviews
#212
of 1,693 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#32,270
of 288,798 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Reviews
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 18,896,657 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,693 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its peers.
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 288,798 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them