↓ Skip to main content

A realist evaluation of the role of communities of practice in changing healthcare practice

Overview of attention for article published in Implementation Science, May 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
85 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
300 Mendeley
citeulike
2 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 realist evaluation of the role of communities of practice in changing healthcare practice
Published in
Implementation Science, May 2011
DOI 10.1186/1748-5908-6-49
Pubmed ID
Authors

Geetha Ranmuthugala, Frances C Cunningham, Jennifer J Plumb, Janet Long, Andrew Georgiou, Johanna I Westbrook, Jeffrey Braithwaite

Abstract

Healthcare organisations seeking to manage knowledge and improve organisational performance are increasingly investing in communities of practice (CoPs). Such investments are being made in the absence of empirical evidence demonstrating the impact of CoPs in improving the delivery of healthcare. A realist evaluation is proposed to address this knowledge gap. Underpinned by the principle that outcomes are determined by the context in which an intervention is implemented, a realist evaluation is well suited to understand the role of CoPs in improving healthcare practice. By applying a realist approach, this study will explore the following questions: What outcomes do CoPs achieve in healthcare? Do these outcomes translate into improved practice in healthcare? What are the contexts and mechanisms by which CoPs improve healthcare?

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 300 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 7 2%
Canada 6 2%
United States 4 1%
Uganda 2 <1%
Spain 2 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Unknown 276 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 68 23%
Researcher 57 19%
Student > Master 51 17%
Other 14 5%
Student > Doctoral Student 14 5%
Other 66 22%
Unknown 30 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 67 22%
Medicine and Dentistry 65 22%
Business, Management and Accounting 30 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 24 8%
Computer Science 14 5%
Other 55 18%
Unknown 45 15%

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 26 March 2015.
All research outputs
#13,736,727
of 21,338,015 outputs
Outputs from Implementation Science
#1,487
of 1,677 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#130,544
of 239,607 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Implementation Science
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,338,015 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 1,677 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% 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 239,607 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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