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 |
Barriers to the use of reminder/recall interventions for immunizations: a systematic review
|
---|---|
Published in |
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, December 2012
|
DOI | 10.1186/1472-6947-12-145 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Jennifer A Pereira, Susan Quach, Christine L Heidebrecht, Sherman D Quan, Faron Kolbe, Michael Finkelstein, Jeffrey C Kwong, the Public Health Agency of Canada/Canadian Institutes of Health Research Influenza Research Network (PCIRN) Vaccine Coverage Theme Group |
Abstract |
Although many studies have demonstrated the benefits of reminder/recall (RR) measures to address patient under-immunization and improve immunization coverage, they are not widely implemented by healthcare providers. We identified providers' perceived barriers to their use from existing literature. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 16 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Canada | 4 | 25% |
United States | 3 | 19% |
Argentina | 2 | 13% |
India | 2 | 13% |
United Kingdom | 1 | 6% |
Unknown | 4 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 9 | 56% |
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 5 | 31% |
Scientists | 1 | 6% |
Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 6% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 102 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
Malaysia | 1 | <1% |
Unknown | 100 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Master | 22 | 22% |
Researcher | 17 | 17% |
Other | 9 | 9% |
Student > Bachelor | 9 | 9% |
Student > Postgraduate | 8 | 8% |
Other | 21 | 21% |
Unknown | 16 | 16% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 42 | 41% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 16 | 16% |
Social Sciences | 8 | 8% |
Psychology | 4 | 4% |
Computer Science | 3 | 3% |
Other | 15 | 15% |
Unknown | 14 | 14% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. 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 18 January 2018.
All research outputs
#1,723,237
of 22,689,790 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#88
of 1,980 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,927
of 261,293 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#6
of 48 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,689,790 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,980 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 261,293 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 48 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.