↓ Skip to main content

Longitudinal evaluation of a course to build core competencies in implementation practice

Overview of attention for article published in Implementation Science, August 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 (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

18 tweeters


28 Dimensions

Readers on

64 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.
Longitudinal evaluation of a course to build core competencies in implementation practice
Published in
Implementation Science, August 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13012-018-0800-3
Pubmed ID

Julia E. Moore, Shusmita Rashid, Jamie S. Park, Sobia Khan, Sharon E. Straus


Few training opportunities are available for implementation practitioners; we designed the Practicing Knowledge Translation (PKT) to address this gap. The goal of PKT is to train practitioners to use evidence and apply implementation science in healthcare settings. The aim of this study was to describe PKT and evaluate participant use of implementation science theories, models, and frameworks (TMFs), knowledge, self-efficacy, and satisfaction and feedback on the course. PKT was delivered to implementation practitioners between September 2015 and February 2016 through a 3-day workshop, 11 webinars. We assessed PKT using an uncontrolled before and after study design, using convergent parallel mixed methods. The primary outcome was use of TMFs in implementation projects. Secondary outcomes were knowledge and self-efficacy across six core competencies, factors related to each of the outcomes, and satisfaction with the course. Participants completed online surveys and semi-structured interviews at baseline, 3, 6, and 12 months. Participants (n = 15) reported an increase in their use of implementation TMFs (mean = 2.11; estimate = 2.11; standard error (SE) = 0.4; p = 0.03). There was a significant increase in participants' knowledge of developing an evidence-informed, theory-driven program (ETP) (estimate = 4.10; SE = 0.37; p = 0.002); evidence implementation (estimate = 2.68; SE = 0.42; p < 0.001); evaluation (estimate = 4.43; SE = 0.36; p < 0.001); sustainability, scale, and spread (estimate = 2.55; SE = 0.34; p < 0.001); and context assessment (estimate = 3.86; SE = 0.32; p < 0.001). There was a significant increase in participants' self-efficacy in developing an ETP (estimate = 3.81; SE = 0.34; p < 0.001); implementation (estimate = 3.01; SE = 0.36; p < 0.001); evaluation (estimate = 3.83; SE = 0.39; p = 0.002); sustainability, scale, and spread (estimate = 3.06; SE = 0.46; p = 0.003); and context assessment (estimate = 4.05; SE = 0.38; p = 0.016). Process and outcome measures collected indicated that PKT participants increased use of, knowledge of, self-efficacy in KT. Our findings highlight the importance of longitudinal evaluations of training initiatives to inform how to build capacity for implementers.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 18 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 64 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 64 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 14%
Researcher 9 14%
Student > Bachelor 6 9%
Professor 5 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 6%
Other 17 27%
Unknown 14 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 16%
Social Sciences 8 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 11%
Psychology 6 9%
Neuroscience 2 3%
Other 10 16%
Unknown 21 33%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 04 February 2021.
All research outputs
of 20,579,757 outputs
Outputs from Implementation Science
of 1,671 outputs
Outputs of similar age
of 297,054 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Implementation Science
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 20,579,757 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,671 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% 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 297,054 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 83% 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