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 |
How does integrated knowledge translation (IKT) compare to other collaborative research approaches to generating and translating knowledge? Learning from experts in the field
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Health Research Policy and Systems, March 2020
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12961-020-0539-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Tram Nguyen, Ian D. Graham, Kelly J. Mrklas, Sarah Bowen, Margaret Cargo, Carole A. Estabrooks, Anita Kothari, John Lavis, Ann C. Macaulay, Martha MacLeod, David Phipps, Vivian R. Ramsden, Mary J. Renfrew, Jon Salsberg, Nina Wallerstein |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 83 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 31 | 37% |
| Australia | 11 | 13% |
| United Kingdom | 4 | 5% |
| United States | 3 | 4% |
| Curaçao | 2 | 2% |
| Taiwan | 1 | 1% |
| Jamaica | 1 | 1% |
| France | 1 | 1% |
| Ireland | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 27 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 36 | 43% |
| Scientists | 34 | 41% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 9 | 11% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 4 | 5% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 274 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 274 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 47 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 38 | 14% |
| Researcher | 27 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 14 | 5% |
| Student > Bachelor | 14 | 5% |
| Other | 41 | 15% |
| Unknown | 93 | 34% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 37 | 14% |
| Social Sciences | 28 | 10% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 24 | 9% |
| Psychology | 15 | 5% |
| Computer Science | 9 | 3% |
| Other | 47 | 17% |
| Unknown | 114 | 42% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 56. 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 28 November 2023.
All research outputs
#757,262
of 25,368,786 outputs
Outputs from Health Research Policy and Systems
#46
of 1,388 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,351
of 395,369 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health Research Policy and Systems
#2
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,368,786 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,388 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.6. 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 395,369 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 94% 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 has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.