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 |
Validation of the theoretical domains framework for use in behaviour change and implementation research
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Implementation Science, April 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1748-5908-7-37 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
James Cane, Denise O’Connor, Susan Michie |
| Abstract |
An integrative theoretical framework, developed for cross-disciplinary implementation and other behaviour change research, has been applied across a wide range of clinical situations. This study tests the validity of this framework. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 23 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 | 5 | 22% |
| Australia | 2 | 9% |
| Finland | 1 | 4% |
| United States | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 14 | 61% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 8 | 35% |
| Scientists | 8 | 35% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 5 | 22% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 9% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 2,498 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 17 | <1% |
| Canada | 7 | <1% |
| United States | 6 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 2 | <1% |
| Spain | 2 | <1% |
| South Africa | 2 | <1% |
| Italy | 1 | <1% |
| Kenya | 1 | <1% |
| Uganda | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 7 | <1% |
| Unknown | 2452 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 416 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 402 | 16% |
| Researcher | 360 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 156 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 134 | 5% |
| Other | 453 | 18% |
| Unknown | 577 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 522 | 21% |
| Psychology | 312 | 12% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 269 | 11% |
| Social Sciences | 209 | 8% |
| Computer Science | 57 | 2% |
| Other | 414 | 17% |
| Unknown | 715 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 61. 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 January 2024.
All research outputs
#715,455
of 26,017,215 outputs
Outputs from Implementation Science
#72
of 1,822 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,335
of 179,351 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Implementation Science
#4
of 37 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,017,215 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
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 14.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 179,351 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 37 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.