↓ Skip to main content

Investigating midwives’ barriers and facilitators to multiple health promotion practice behaviours: a qualitative study using the theoretical domains framework

Overview of attention for article published in Implementation Science, June 2019
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 (91st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (71st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
41 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
149 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.
Title
Investigating midwives’ barriers and facilitators to multiple health promotion practice behaviours: a qualitative study using the theoretical domains framework
Published in
Implementation Science, June 2019
DOI 10.1186/s13012-019-0913-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Julie M. McLellan, Ronan E. O’Carroll, Helen Cheyne, Stephan U. Dombrowski

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 41 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 149 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 149 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 22 15%
Student > Bachelor 22 15%
Researcher 13 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 6%
Other 20 13%
Unknown 50 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 37 25%
Medicine and Dentistry 18 12%
Psychology 11 7%
Social Sciences 6 4%
Engineering 3 2%
Other 20 13%
Unknown 54 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 26. 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 19 November 2019.
All research outputs
#1,392,573
of 24,580,204 outputs
Outputs from Implementation Science
#248
of 1,771 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#30,548
of 356,851 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Implementation Science
#9
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,580,204 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,771 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 356,851 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 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.