| Title |
Implementation interventions to promote the uptake of evidence-based practices in stroke rehabilitation
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2020
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd012575.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Liana S Cahill, Leeanne M Carey, Natasha A Lannin, Megan Turville, Cheryl L Neilson, Elizabeth A Lynch, Carol E McKinstry, Jia Xi Han, Denise O'Connor |
Twitter Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 81 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 15 | 19% |
| Australia | 14 | 17% |
| Japan | 4 | 5% |
| France | 2 | 2% |
| Curaçao | 2 | 2% |
| Brazil | 2 | 2% |
| Belgium | 2 | 2% |
| Mexico | 1 | 1% |
| Central African Republic | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 4 | 5% |
| Unknown | 34 | 42% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 59 | 73% |
| Scientists | 17 | 21% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 5 | 6% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 268 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 268 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unspecified | 32 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 32 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 24 | 9% |
| Researcher | 16 | 6% |
| Other | 13 | 5% |
| Other | 46 | 17% |
| Unknown | 105 | 39% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 43 | 16% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 42 | 16% |
| Unspecified | 35 | 13% |
| Psychology | 7 | 3% |
| Neuroscience | 6 | 2% |
| Other | 22 | 8% |
| Unknown | 113 | 42% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 53. 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 17 September 2023.
All research outputs
#755,376
of 24,529,782 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#1,476
of 12,929 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,433
of 421,298 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#31
of 177 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,529,782 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 12,929 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 34.7. 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 421,298 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 177 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.