↓ Skip to main content

A systematic review of barriers to and facilitators of the use of evidence by policymakers

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, January 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#10 of 8,799)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets
blogs
10 blogs
policy
8 policy sources
twitter
421 X users
facebook
6 Facebook pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
880 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
1149 Mendeley
citeulike
6 CiteULike
Title
A systematic review of barriers to and facilitators of the use of evidence by policymakers
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, January 2014
DOI 10.1186/1472-6963-14-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kathryn Oliver, Simon Innvar, Theo Lorenc, Jenny Woodman, James Thomas

Abstract

The gap between research and practice or policy is often described as a problem. To identify new barriers of and facilitators to the use of evidence by policymakers, and assess the state of research in this area, we updated a systematic review.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 421 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 1,149 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 13 1%
Canada 3 <1%
United States 3 <1%
Switzerland 2 <1%
South Africa 2 <1%
Australia 2 <1%
Brazil 2 <1%
Kenya 1 <1%
Botswana 1 <1%
Other 10 <1%
Unknown 1110 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 204 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 193 17%
Student > Master 173 15%
Other 62 5%
Student > Doctoral Student 55 5%
Other 225 20%
Unknown 237 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 282 25%
Medicine and Dentistry 197 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 101 9%
Environmental Science 37 3%
Business, Management and Accounting 34 3%
Other 204 18%
Unknown 294 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 378. 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 08 May 2024.
All research outputs
#84,495
of 25,872,466 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#10
of 8,799 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#657
of 320,650 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#1
of 111 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,872,466 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,799 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 320,650 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 111 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 99% of its contemporaries.