| Title |
Practical considerations in improving research through public involvement
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Research Involvement and Engagement, June 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s40900-015-0002-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Martin K Jenner, Mark Gilchrist, Gillian C Baker |
| Abstract |
There is huge commitment to public and patient involvement (PPI) in UK clinical research. Despite there being wide agreement to practice PPI and national guidance on the subject, there are few practical examples of how to implement PPI and few published models to demonstrate how it can be achieved consistently and constructively across a broad portfolio of studies. The Peninsula Research Bank demonstrates how good PPI can be effectively integrated into experimental medicine research. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 | 3 | 43% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 14% |
| Unknown | 3 | 43% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 71% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 14% |
| Scientists | 1 | 14% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 35 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 3% |
| United States | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 33 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 8 | 23% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 14% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 9% |
| Other | 7 | 20% |
| Unknown | 5 | 14% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 23% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 14% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 11% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 6% |
| Sports and Recreations | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 7 | 20% |
| Unknown | 7 | 20% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 03 August 2016.
All research outputs
#2,717,859
of 25,820,938 outputs
Outputs from Research Involvement and Engagement
#240
of 521 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#32,994
of 279,145 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Research Involvement and Engagement
#6
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,820,938 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 521 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% 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 279,145 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.