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 |
What are the reasons for clinical network success? A qualitative study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Health Services Research, November 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12913-015-1096-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Elizabeth McInnes, Mary Haines, Amanda Dominello, Deanna Kalucy, Asmara Jammali-Blasi, Sandy Middleton, Emily Klineberg |
| Abstract |
Clinical networks have been established to improve patient outcomes and processes of care by implementing a range of innovations and undertaking projects based on the needs of local health services. Given the significant investment in clinical networks internationally, it is important to assess their effectiveness and sustainability. This qualitative study investigated the views of stakeholders on the factors they thought were influential in terms of overall network success. Ten participants were interviewed using face-to-face, audio-recorded semi-structured interviews about critical factors for networks' successes over the study period 2006-2008. Respondents were purposively selected from two stakeholder groups: i) chairs of networks during the study period of 2006-2008 from high- moderate- and low-impact networks (as previously determined by an independent review panel) and ii) experts in the clinical field of the network who had a connection to the network but who were not network members. Participants were blind to the performance of the network they were interviewed about. Transcribed data were coded and analysed to generate themes relating to the study aims. Themes relating to influential factors critical to network success were: network model principles; leadership; formal organisational structures and processes; nature of network projects; external relationships; profile and credibility of the network. This study provides clinical networks with guidance on essential factors for maximising optimal network outcomes and that may assist networks to move from being a 'low-impact' to 'high-impact' network. Important ingredients for successful clinical networks were visionary and strategic leadership with strong links to external stakeholders; and having formal infrastructure and processes to enable the development and management of work plans aligned with health priorities. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 73 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 72 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 13 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 12% |
| Researcher | 8 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 8% |
| Other | 6 | 8% |
| Other | 13 | 18% |
| Unknown | 18 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 16 | 22% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 10 | 14% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 11% |
| Social Sciences | 6 | 8% |
| Engineering | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 8 | 11% |
| Unknown | 22 | 30% |
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 23 November 2015.
All research outputs
#20,296,405
of 22,833,393 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#7,104
of 7,638 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#239,163
of 285,428 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#125
of 132 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,833,393 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,638 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 285,428 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 132 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.