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 |
The Life Science Exchange: a case study of a sectoral and sub-sectoral knowledge exchange programme
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Health Research Policy and Systems, April 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12961-016-0105-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Brian Lee Perkins, Rob Garlick, Jodie Wren, Jon Smart, Julie Kennedy, Phil Stephens, Gwyn Tudor, Jonathan Bisson, David V. Ford |
| Abstract |
Local and national governments have implemented sector-specific policies to support economic development through innovation, entrepreneurship and knowledge exchange. Supported by the Welsh Government through the European Regional Development Fund, The Life Science Exchange® project was created with the aim to increase interaction between stakeholders, to develop more effective knowledge exchange mechanisms, and to stimulate the formation and maintenance of long-term collaborative relationships within the Welsh life sciences ecosystem. The Life Science Exchange allowed participants to interact with other stakeholder communities (clinical, academic, business, governmental), exchange perspectives and discover new opportunities. Six sub-sector focus groups comprising over 200 senior stakeholders from academia, industry, the Welsh Government and National Health Service were established. Over 18 months, each focus group provided input to inform healthcare innovation policy and knowledge mapping exercises of their respective sub-sectors. Collaborative projects identified during the focus groups and stakeholder engagement were further developed through sandpit events and bespoke support. Each sub-sector focus group produced a report outlining the significant strengths and opportunities in their respective areas of focus, made recommendations to overcome any 'system failures', and identified the stakeholder groups which needed to take action. A second outcome was a stakeholder-driven knowledge mapping exercise for each area of focus. Finally, the sandpit events and bespoke support resulted in participants generating more than £1.66 million in grant funding and inward investment. This article outlines four separate outcomes from the Life Science Exchange programme. The Life Science Exchange process has resulted in a multitude of collaborations, projects, inward investment opportunities and special interest group formations, in addition to securing over ten times its own costs in funding for Wales. The Life Science Exchange model is a simple and straightforward mechanism for a regional or national government to adapt and implement in order to improve innovation, skills, networks and knowledge exchange. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 Kingdom | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 3 | 75% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 70 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 70 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 18 | 26% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 9 | 13% |
| Unknown | 17 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Business, Management and Accounting | 10 | 14% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 10 | 14% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 10% |
| Computer Science | 5 | 7% |
| Psychology | 5 | 7% |
| Other | 16 | 23% |
| Unknown | 17 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 February 2018.
All research outputs
#13,424,483
of 23,175,240 outputs
Outputs from Health Research Policy and Systems
#956
of 1,230 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#143,165
of 299,767 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health Research Policy and Systems
#24
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,175,240 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,230 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.1. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% 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 299,767 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 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.