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 |
Meeting physicians’ needs: a bottom-up approach for improving the implementation of medical knowledge into practice
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Health Research Policy and Systems, July 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12961-016-0120-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Carla Vaucher, Emilie Bovet, Theresa Bengough, Vincent Pidoux, Michèle Grossen, Francesco Panese, Bernard Burnand |
| Abstract |
Multiple barriers to knowledge translation in medicine have been identified (ranging from information overload to abstraction of models), leading to important implementation gaps. This study aimed at assessing the suggestions of practicing physicians for possible improvements of knowledge translation (KT) effectiveness into clinical practice. We used a mixed methods design. French- German- and Italian-speaking general practitioners, psychiatrists, orthopaedic surgeons, cardiologists, and diabetologists practicing in Switzerland were interrogated through semi-structured interviews, focus group discussions, and an online survey. A total of 985 physicians from three regions of Switzerland participated in the online survey, whereas 39 participated in focus group discussions and 14 in face-to-face interviews. Physicians expressed limitations and difficulties related to KT into their daily practice. Several barriers were identified, including influence and pressure of pharmaceutical companies, non-publication of negative results, mismatch between guidelines and practice, education gaps, and insufficient collaboration between research and practice. Suggestions to overcome barriers were improving education concerning the evaluation of scientific publications, expanding applicability of guidelines, having free and easy access to independent journals, developing collaborations between research and practice, and creating tools to facilitate access to medical information. Our study provides suggestions for improving KT into daily medical practice, matching the views, needs and preferences of practicing physicians. Responding to suggestions for improvements brought up by physicians may lead to better knowledge translation, higher professional satisfaction, and better healthcare outcomes. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 18 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 | 4 | 22% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 11% |
| India | 1 | 6% |
| Norway | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 10 | 56% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 10 | 56% |
| Scientists | 5 | 28% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 11% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 6% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 103 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 102 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 18 | 17% |
| Researcher | 14 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 9% |
| Other | 6 | 6% |
| Other | 14 | 14% |
| Unknown | 30 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 20 | 19% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 11 | 11% |
| Psychology | 5 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 5 | 5% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 4 | 4% |
| Other | 22 | 21% |
| Unknown | 36 | 35% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 04 August 2017.
All research outputs
#3,380,285
of 25,721,020 outputs
Outputs from Health Research Policy and Systems
#484
of 1,407 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#58,569
of 378,912 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health Research Policy and Systems
#6
of 25 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,721,020 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,407 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% 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 378,912 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 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 25 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.