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 |
Implementation of the uterine fibroids Option Grid patient decision aids across five organizational settings: a randomized stepped-wedge study protocol
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Implementation Science, September 2019
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13012-019-0933-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Peter Scalia, Marie-Anne Durand, Rachel C. Forcino, Danielle Schubbe, Paul J. Barr, Nancy O’Brien, A. James O’Malley, Tina Foster, Mary C. Politi, Shannon Laughlin-Tommaso, Erika Banks, Tessa Madden, Raymond M. Anchan, Johanna W. M. Aarts, Priscilla Velentgas, Joyce Balls-Berry, Carla Bacon, Monica Adams-Foster, Carrie Cahill Mulligan, Sateria Venable, Nancy E. Cochran, Glyn Elwyn |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 25% |
| Germany | 1 | 13% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 13% |
| Unknown | 4 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 38% |
| Scientists | 2 | 25% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 25% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 13% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 221 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 221 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 27 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 26 | 12% |
| Researcher | 25 | 11% |
| Other | 10 | 5% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 7 | 3% |
| Other | 34 | 15% |
| Unknown | 92 | 42% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 39 | 18% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 30 | 14% |
| Social Sciences | 9 | 4% |
| Psychology | 8 | 4% |
| Unspecified | 5 | 2% |
| Other | 29 | 13% |
| Unknown | 101 | 46% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 16 September 2019.
All research outputs
#7,214,872
of 25,848,962 outputs
Outputs from Implementation Science
#1,132
of 1,822 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#117,464
of 351,568 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Implementation Science
#12
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,848,962 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,822 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.8. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% 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 351,568 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.