| Title |
Interprofessional collaboration to improve professional practice and healthcare outcomes
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, June 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd000072.pub3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Scott Reeves, Ferruccio Pelone, Reema Harrison, Joanne Goldman, Merrick Zwarenstein |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 126 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 35 | 28% |
| United States | 11 | 9% |
| Australia | 4 | 3% |
| Spain | 3 | 2% |
| New Zealand | 3 | 2% |
| Colombia | 2 | 2% |
| Canada | 2 | 2% |
| Ireland | 2 | 2% |
| France | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 15 | 12% |
| Unknown | 47 | 37% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 64 | 51% |
| Scientists | 36 | 29% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 21 | 17% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 4 | 3% |
| Unknown | 1 | <1% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 1,601 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1601 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 239 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 228 | 14% |
| Researcher | 95 | 6% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 87 | 5% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 74 | 5% |
| Other | 299 | 19% |
| Unknown | 579 | 36% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 403 | 25% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 274 | 17% |
| Social Sciences | 62 | 4% |
| Psychology | 39 | 2% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 36 | 2% |
| Other | 163 | 10% |
| Unknown | 624 | 39% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 94. 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 22 November 2022.
All research outputs
#459,349
of 25,765,370 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#802
of 13,137 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,617
of 330,829 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#26
of 272 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,765,370 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,137 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 330,829 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 272 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 90% of its contemporaries.