| Title |
Interventions for improving the adoption of shared decision making by healthcare professionals
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, September 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd006732.pub3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
France Légaré, Dawn Stacey, Stéphane Turcotte, Marie‐Joëlle Cossi, Jennifer Kryworuchko, Ian D Graham, Anne Lyddiatt, Mary C Politi, Richard Thomson, Glyn Elwyn, Norbert Donner‐Banzhoff |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 61 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 | 8 | 13% |
| Spain | 6 | 10% |
| United Kingdom | 6 | 10% |
| Australia | 3 | 5% |
| France | 3 | 5% |
| United States | 3 | 5% |
| United Arab Emirates | 1 | 2% |
| South Africa | 1 | 2% |
| China | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 29 | 48% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 36 | 59% |
| Scientists | 11 | 18% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 9 | 15% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 5 | 8% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 517 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 6 | 1% |
| United Kingdom | 6 | 1% |
| Canada | 5 | <1% |
| Denmark | 1 | <1% |
| South Africa | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 498 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 85 | 16% |
| Researcher | 71 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 68 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 43 | 8% |
| Other | 30 | 6% |
| Other | 118 | 23% |
| Unknown | 102 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 166 | 32% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 63 | 12% |
| Psychology | 35 | 7% |
| Social Sciences | 31 | 6% |
| Computer Science | 12 | 2% |
| Other | 67 | 13% |
| Unknown | 143 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 52. 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 29 November 2019.
All research outputs
#829,150
of 25,809,907 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#1,512
of 13,129 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#8,330
of 259,588 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#20
of 228 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,809,907 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,129 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 259,588 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 228 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 91% of its contemporaries.