↓ Skip to main content

Indigenous populations health protection: A Canadian perspective

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

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
113 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
Indigenous populations health protection: A Canadian perspective
Published in
BMC Public Health, December 2012
DOI 10.1186/1471-2458-12-1098
Pubmed ID
Authors

Katya L Richardson, Michelle S Driedger, Nick J Pizzi, Jianhong Wu, Seyed M Moghadas

Abstract

The disproportionate effects of the 2009 H1N1 pandemic on many Canadian Aboriginal communities have drawn attention to the vulnerability of these communities in terms of health outcomes in the face of emerging and reemerging infectious diseases. Exploring the particular challenges facing these communities is essential to improving public health planning. In alignment with the objectives of the Pandemic Influenza Outbreak Research Modelling (Pan-InfORM) team, a Canadian public health workshop was held at the Centre for Disease Modelling (CDM) to: (i) evaluate post-pandemic research findings; (ii) identify existing gaps in knowledge that have yet to be addressed through ongoing research and collaborative activities; and (iii) build upon existing partnerships within the research community to forge new collaborative links with Aboriginal health organizations. The workshop achieved its objectives in identifying main research findings and emerging information post pandemic, and highlighting key challenges that pose significant impediments to the health protection and promotion of Canadian Aboriginal populations. The health challenges faced by Canadian indigenous populations are unique and complex, and can only be addressed through active engagement with affected communities. The academic research community will need to develop a new interdisciplinary framework, building upon concepts from 'Communities of Practice', to ensure that the research priorities are identified and targeted, and the outcomes are translated into the context of community health to improve policy and practice.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 113 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 112 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 22 19%
Student > Bachelor 16 14%
Researcher 15 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 11%
Other 5 4%
Other 17 15%
Unknown 26 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 18%
Social Sciences 20 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 12%
Psychology 7 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 4%
Other 15 13%
Unknown 34 30%
Attention Score in Context

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 31 December 2012.
All research outputs
#14,740,534
of 22,689,790 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#10,818
of 14,764 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#175,158
of 280,184 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#208
of 285 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,689,790 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,764 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% 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 280,184 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 285 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.