↓ Skip to main content

A knowledge management tool for public health: health-evidence.ca

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, August 2010
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)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (71st percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
56 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
223 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
A knowledge management tool for public health: health-evidence.ca
Published in
BMC Public Health, August 2010
DOI 10.1186/1471-2458-10-496
Pubmed ID
Authors

Maureen Dobbins, Kara DeCorby, Paula Robeson, Heather Husson, Daiva Tirilis, Lori Greco

Abstract

The ultimate goal of knowledge translation and exchange (KTE) activities is to facilitate incorporation of research knowledge into program and policy development decision making. Evidence-informed decision making involves translation of the best available evidence from a systematically collected, appraised, and analyzed body of knowledge. Knowledge management (KM) is emerging as a key factor contributing to the realization of evidence-informed public health decision making. The goal of health-evidence.ca is to promote evidence-informed public health decision making through facilitation of decision maker access to, retrieval, and use of the best available synthesized research evidence evaluating the effectiveness of public health interventions.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 223 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 6 3%
Canada 5 2%
Chile 4 2%
United Kingdom 3 1%
France 2 <1%
South Africa 2 <1%
Brazil 2 <1%
Colombia 1 <1%
Uruguay 1 <1%
Other 6 3%
Unknown 191 86%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 43 19%
Researcher 30 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 30 13%
Librarian 19 9%
Other 16 7%
Other 60 27%
Unknown 25 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 69 31%
Social Sciences 33 15%
Computer Science 19 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 17 8%
Business, Management and Accounting 14 6%
Other 37 17%
Unknown 34 15%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 06 July 2023.
All research outputs
#4,086,544
of 23,342,092 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#4,506
of 15,202 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,197
of 95,921 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#23
of 78 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,342,092 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,202 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% 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 95,921 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 78 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.