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 |
Spatial accessibility of primary health care utilising the two step floating catchment area method: an assessment of recent improvements
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Health Geographics, November 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1476-072x-11-50 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Matthew R McGrail |
| Abstract |
The two step floating catchment area (2SFCA) method has emerged in the last decade as a key measure of spatial accessibility, particularly in its application to primary health care access. Many recent 'improvements' to the original 2SFCA method have been developed, which generally either account for distance-decay within a catchment or enable the usage of variable catchment sizes. This paper evaluates the effectiveness of various proposed methods within these two improvement groups. Moreover, its assessment focuses on how well these improvements operate within and between rural and metropolitan populations over large geographical regions. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Saudi Arabia | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 326 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | <1% |
| Brazil | 2 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Kenya | 1 | <1% |
| India | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Thailand | 1 | <1% |
| Belgium | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 2 | <1% |
| Unknown | 313 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 57 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 55 | 17% |
| Researcher | 54 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 19 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 16 | 5% |
| Other | 56 | 17% |
| Unknown | 69 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 53 | 16% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 43 | 13% |
| Engineering | 27 | 8% |
| Environmental Science | 24 | 7% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 21 | 6% |
| Other | 67 | 21% |
| Unknown | 91 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 26 July 2017.
All research outputs
#17,093,996
of 25,898,387 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Health Geographics
#437
of 654 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#115,048
of 180,481 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Health Geographics
#8
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,898,387 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 654 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.8. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% 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 180,481 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.