↓ Skip to main content

Investigation of factors influencing the implementation of two shared decision-making interventions in contraceptive care: a qualitative interview study among clinical and administrative staff

Overview of attention for article published in Implementation Science, November 2019
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (89th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (71st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
29 tweeters

Readers on

mendeley
9 Mendeley
Title
Investigation of factors influencing the implementation of two shared decision-making interventions in contraceptive care: a qualitative interview study among clinical and administrative staff
Published in
Implementation Science, November 2019
DOI 10.1186/s13012-019-0941-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sarah Munro, Ruth Manski, Kyla Z. Donnelly, Daniela Agusti, Gabrielle Stevens, Michelle Banach, Maureen B. Boardman, Pearl Brady, Chrissy Colón Bradt, Tina Foster, Deborah J. Johnson, Judy Norsigian, Melissa Nothnagle, Heather L. Shepherd, Lisa Stern, Lyndal Trevena, Glyn Elwyn, Rachel Thompson

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 29 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 9 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 9 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 3 33%
Researcher 3 33%
Lecturer 1 11%
Other 1 11%
Student > Master 1 11%
Other 0 0%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 4 44%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 33%
Social Sciences 1 11%
Unknown 1 11%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. 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 27 November 2019.
All research outputs
#874,039
of 14,067,552 outputs
Outputs from Implementation Science
#260
of 1,416 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#33,069
of 307,332 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Implementation Science
#30
of 107 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,067,552 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,416 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 307,332 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 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 107 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.