↓ 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

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (69th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
85 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.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 85 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 83 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 16 19%
Student > Master 14 16%
Student > Bachelor 9 11%
Other 6 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 6%
Other 19 22%
Unknown 16 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 19%
Social Sciences 12 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 8%
Environmental Science 7 8%
Psychology 6 7%
Other 18 21%
Unknown 19 22%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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
#6,917,125
of 22,685,926 outputs
Outputs from BMC Research Notes
#1,096
of 4,253 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#53,163
of 184,146 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Research Notes
#20
of 75 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,685,926 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,253 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 184,146 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 75 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 69% of its contemporaries.