↓ Skip to main content

Intravaginal practices and microbicide acceptability in Papua New Guinea: implications for HIV prevention in a moderate-prevalence setting

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Research Notes, November 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (53rd percentile)

Mentioned by

wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
95 Mendeley
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.
Title
Intravaginal practices and microbicide acceptability in Papua New Guinea: implications for HIV prevention in a moderate-prevalence setting
Published in
BMC Research Notes, November 2012
DOI 10.1186/1756-0500-5-613
Pubmed ID
Authors

Andrew Vallely, Lisa Fitzgerald, Voletta Fiya, Herick Aeno, Angela Kelly, Joyce Sauk, Martha Kupul, James Neo, John Millan, Peter Siba, John M Kaldor

Abstract

The acceptability of female-controlled biomedical prevention technologies has not been established in Papua New Guinea, the only country in the Pacific region experiencing a generalised, moderate-prevalence HIV epidemic. Socio-cultural factors likely to impact on future product uptake and effectiveness, such as women's ability to negotiate safer sexual choices, and intravaginal hygiene and menstrual practices (IVP), remain unclear in this setting.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 95 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Portugal 1 1%
Germany 1 1%
Unknown 93 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 15 16%
Researcher 12 13%
Student > Bachelor 9 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 8%
Other 7 7%
Other 20 21%
Unknown 24 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 18 19%
Social Sciences 13 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 5%
Psychology 4 4%
Other 21 22%
Unknown 27 28%
Attention Score in Context

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 20 September 2014.
All research outputs
#8,961,421
of 26,367,306 outputs
Outputs from BMC Research Notes
#1,409
of 4,562 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#69,200
of 205,061 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Research Notes
#25
of 76 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,367,306 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,562 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% 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 205,061 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 76 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 53% of its contemporaries.