↓ Skip to main content

Risks, benefits and survival strategies-views from female sex workers in Savannakhet, Laos

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, November 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (79th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (74th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 tweeters
wikipedia
4 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
87 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
Risks, benefits and survival strategies-views from female sex workers in Savannakhet, Laos
Published in
BMC Public Health, November 2012
DOI 10.1186/1471-2458-12-1004
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ketkesone Phrasisombath, Elisabeth Faxelid, Vanphanom Sychareun, Sarah Thomsen

Abstract

Female sex workers (FSWs) are vulnerable to sexually transmitted infections (STIs) and encounter socio-economic and health problems, including STIs/HIV, unintended pregnancy and complications from unsafe abortion, stigma, violence, and drug addiction. Reducing risks associated with sex work requires an understanding of the social and cultural context in which sex workers live and work. This study aimed to explore the working environment and perceived risks among FSWs in Savannakhet province in Laos.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 tweeters 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 87 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 87 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 26 30%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 16%
Researcher 9 10%
Student > Bachelor 9 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 7%
Other 13 15%
Unknown 10 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 29%
Nursing and Health Professions 14 16%
Social Sciences 14 16%
Psychology 11 13%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 3 3%
Other 9 10%
Unknown 11 13%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 11 September 2018.
All research outputs
#4,129,748
of 17,475,439 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#4,051
of 11,812 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#54,239
of 262,443 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#264
of 1,061 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,475,439 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 76th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,812 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% 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 262,443 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,061 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 74% of its contemporaries.