↓ Skip to main content

What makes an academic paper useful for health policy?

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medicine, December 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#39 of 4,059)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (97th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
11 blogs
policy
2 policy sources
twitter
1124 X users
facebook
11 Facebook pages
googleplus
3 Google+ users

Citations

dimensions_citation
128 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
342 Mendeley
citeulike
3 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
What makes an academic paper useful for health policy?
Published in
BMC Medicine, December 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12916-015-0544-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christopher J. M. Whitty

Abstract

Evidence-based policy ensures that the best interventions are effectively implemented. Integrating rigorous, relevant science into policy is therefore essential. Barriers include the evidence not being there; lack of demand by policymakers; academics not producing rigorous, relevant papers within the timeframe of the policy cycle. This piece addresses the last problem. Academics underestimate the speed of the policy process, and publish excellent papers after a policy decision rather than good ones before it. To be useful in policy, papers must be at least as rigorous about reporting their methods as for other academic uses. Papers which are as simple as possible (but no simpler) are most likely to be taken up in policy. Most policy questions have many scientific questions, from different disciplines, within them. The accurate synthesis of existing information is the most important single offering by academics to the policy process. Since policymakers are making economic decisions, economic analysis is central, as are the qualitative social sciences. Models should, wherever possible, allow policymakers to vary assumptions. Objective, rigorous, original studies from multiple disciplines relevant to a policy question need to be synthesized before being incorporated into policy.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 1,124 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 342 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 10 3%
Canada 2 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Sierra Leone 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Sri Lanka 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Other 2 <1%
Unknown 321 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 74 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 51 15%
Student > Master 48 14%
Other 27 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 18 5%
Other 67 20%
Unknown 57 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 90 26%
Social Sciences 43 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 29 8%
Psychology 23 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 22 6%
Other 55 16%
Unknown 80 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 763. 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 01 December 2023.
All research outputs
#25,825
of 25,582,611 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medicine
#39
of 4,059 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#276
of 381,231 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medicine
#2
of 48 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,582,611 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,059 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 45.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 381,231 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 48 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.