You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Behavioural intervention to increase physical activity in adults with coronary heart disease in Jordan
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Public Health, July 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12889-016-3313-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Eman Alsaleh, Richard Windle, Holly Blake |
| Abstract |
Patients with coronary heart disease often do not follow prescribed physical activity recommendations. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of a behavioural intervention to increase physical activity in patients with coronary heart disease not attending structured cardiac rehabilitation programmes. Parallel randomised controlled trial comparing 6-month multi-component behavioural change intervention (n = 71) with usual care (n = 85) was conducted in two hospitals in Jordan, Middle East. Intervention included one face-to-face individualised consultation, 6 telephone support calls (for goal-setting, feedback and self-monitoring) and 18 reminder text messages. Patients were randomly allocated to the two groups by opening opaque sealed sequence envelopes. The patients and the researcher who provided the intervention and assessed the outcomes were not blinded. Outcomes were assessed at baseline and 6 months. Primary outcome was physical activity level, secondary outcomes were blood pressure, body mass index, exercise self-efficacy for exercise and health-related quality of life. Intervention and control groups were comparable at baseline. Moderate physical activity significantly increased in the intervention group compared with control group (mean change (SD) of frequency: 0.23 (0.87) days/week versus -.06 (0.40); duration: 15.53 (90.15) minutes/week versus -3.67 (22.60) minutes/week; intensity: 31.05 (105.98) Metabolic equivalents (METs) versus 14.68 (90.40) METs). Effect size was 0.03 for moderate PA frequency, 0.02 for moderate PA duration and 0.01 for moderate PA intensity. Walking significantly increased in the intervention group compared with control group (mean change (SD) of frequency: 3.15 (2.75) days/week versus 0.37 (1.83) days/week; duration: 150.90 (124.47) minutes/week versus 24.05 (195.93) minutes/week; intensity: 495.12 (413.74) METs versus14.62 (265.06) METs). Effect size was 0.36 for walking frequency, 0.05 for walking duration, 0.32 for walking intensity and 0.29 for total PA intensity. Intervention participants had significantly lower blood pressure, lower body mass index, greater exercise self-efficacy and better health-related quality of life at 6 months compared with controls. Multi-component behavioural intervention increases physical activity, and improves body composition, physiological and psychological outcomes in CHD patients not attending structured rehabilitation programmes. Current Controlled Trials retrospectively registered in 21-03-2012. ISRCTN48570595 . |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 | 3 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 33% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 33% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 245 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 245 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 34 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 28 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 20 | 8% |
| Other | 18 | 7% |
| Researcher | 18 | 7% |
| Other | 39 | 16% |
| Unknown | 88 | 36% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 61 | 25% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 26 | 11% |
| Psychology | 13 | 5% |
| Sports and Recreations | 11 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 10 | 4% |
| Other | 26 | 11% |
| Unknown | 98 | 40% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 12 December 2016.
All research outputs
#13,124,430
of 22,881,964 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#9,172
of 14,922 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#192,836
of 365,298 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#219
of 349 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,881,964 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,922 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 365,298 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 349 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.