↓ Skip to main content

I-RREACH: an engagement and assessment tool for improving implementation readiness of researchers, organizations and communities in complex interventions

Overview of attention for article published in Implementation Science, May 2015
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 (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
12 tweeters
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
183 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
I-RREACH: an engagement and assessment tool for improving implementation readiness of researchers, organizations and communities in complex interventions
Published in
Implementation Science, May 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13012-015-0257-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marion Maar, Karen Yeates, Marcia Barron, Diane Hua, Peter Liu, Margaret Moy Lum-Kwong, Nancy Perkins, Jessica Sleeth, Joshua Tobe, Mary Jo Wabano, Pamela Williamson, Sheldon W Tobe

Abstract

Non-communicable chronic diseases are the leading causes of mortality globally, and nearly 80% of these deaths occur in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). In high-income countries (HICs), inequitable distribution of resources affects poorer and otherwise disadvantaged groups including Aboriginal peoples. Cardiovascular mortality in high-income countries has recently begun to fall; however, these improvements are not realized among citizens in LMICs or those subgroups in high-income countries who are disadvantaged in the social determinants of health including Aboriginal people. It is critical to develop multi-faceted, affordable and realistic health interventions in collaboration with groups who experience health inequalities. Based on community-based participatory research (CBPR), we aimed to develop implementation tools to guide complex interventions to ensure that health gains can be realized in low-resource environments. We developed the I-RREACH (Intervention and Research Readiness Engagement and Assessment of Community Health Care) tool to guide implementation of interventions in low-resource environments. We employed CBPR and a consensus methodology to (1) develop the theoretical basis of the tool and (2) to identify key implementation factor domains; then, we (3) collected participant evaluation data to validate the tool during implementation. The I-RREACH tool was successfully developed using a community-based consensus method and is rooted in participatory principles, equalizing the importance of the knowledge and perspectives of researchers and community stakeholders while encouraging respectful dialogue. The I-RREACH tool consists of three phases: fact finding, stakeholder dialogue and community member/ patient dialogue. The evaluation for our first implementation of I-RREACH by participants was overwhelmingly positive, with 95% or more of participants indicating comfort with and support for the process and the dialogue it creates. The I-RREACH tool was designed to (1) pinpoint key domains required for dialogue between the community and the research team to facilitate implementation of complex health interventions and research projects and (2) to identify existing strengths and areas requiring further development for effective implementation. I-RREACH has been found to be easily adaptable to diverse geographical and cultural settings and can be further adapted to other complex interventions. Further research should include the potential use of the I-RREACH tool in the development of blue prints for scale-up of successful interventions, particularly in low-resource environments.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 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 183 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
New Zealand 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 179 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 38 21%
Researcher 29 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 13%
Student > Bachelor 13 7%
Librarian 10 5%
Other 45 25%
Unknown 24 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 43 23%
Social Sciences 33 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 30 16%
Psychology 9 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 5 3%
Other 28 15%
Unknown 35 19%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 03 February 2016.
All research outputs
#3,013,132
of 19,211,930 outputs
Outputs from Implementation Science
#696
of 1,633 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#42,182
of 239,567 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Implementation Science
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 19,211,930 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,633 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% 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 239,567 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 82% 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