↓ Skip to main content

Cross-cultural adaptation of an environmental health measurement instrument: Brazilian version of the health-care waste management • rapid assessment tool

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter
facebook
1 Facebook page
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
49 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
Cross-cultural adaptation of an environmental health measurement instrument: Brazilian version of the health-care waste management • rapid assessment tool
Published in
BMC Public Health, September 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12889-016-3618-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Eliana Napoleão Cozendey-Silva, Cintia Ribeiro da Silva, Ariane Leites Larentis, Julio Cesar Wasserman, Brani Rozemberg, Liliane Reis Teixeira

Abstract

Periodic assessment is one of the recommendations for improving health-care waste management worldwide. This study aimed at translating and adapting the Health-Care Waste Management - Rapid Assessment Tool (HCWM-RAT), proposed by the World Health Organization, to a Brazilian Portuguese version, and resolving its cultural and legal issues. The work focused on the evaluation of the concepts, items and semantic equivalence between the original tool and the Brazilian Portuguese version. A cross-cultural adaptation methodology was used, including: initial translation to Brazilian Portuguese; back translation to English; syntheses of these translation versions; formation of an expert committee to achieve consensus about the preliminary version; and evaluation of the target audience's comprehension. Both the translated and the original versions' concepts, items and semantic equivalence are presented. The constructs in the original instrument were considered relevant and applicable to the Brazilian context. The Brazilian version of the tool has the potential to generate indicators, develop official database, feedback and subsidize political decisions at many geographical and organizational levels strengthening the Monitoring and evaluation (M&E) mechanism. Moreover, the cross-cultural translation expands the usefulness of the instrument to Portuguese-speaking countries in developing regions. The translated and original versions presented concept, item and semantic equivalence and can be applied to Brazil.

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 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Ghana 1 2%
Unknown 48 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 22%
Student > Bachelor 9 18%
Professor 7 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 10%
Researcher 3 6%
Other 8 16%
Unknown 6 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 20%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 14%
Environmental Science 6 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 10%
Engineering 4 8%
Other 9 18%
Unknown 8 16%

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 20 September 2016.
All research outputs
#6,493,611
of 11,344,026 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#5,107
of 7,742 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#122,155
of 259,259 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#239
of 350 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,344,026 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,742 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.1. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% 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 259,259 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 350 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.