↓ Skip to main content

Which outcome expectancies are important in determining young adults’ intentions to use condoms with casual sexual partners?: a cross-sectional study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, February 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (64th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
29 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
120 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
Which outcome expectancies are important in determining young adults’ intentions to use condoms with casual sexual partners?: a cross-sectional study
Published in
BMC Public Health, February 2013
DOI 10.1186/1471-2458-13-133
Pubmed ID
Authors

Katie V Newby, Katherine E Brown, David P French, Louise M Wallace

Abstract

The prevalence of unwanted pregnancy and sexually transmitted infection amongst young adults represents an important public health problem in the UK. Individuals' attitude towards the use of condoms has been identified as an important determinant of behavioural intentions and action. The Theory of Planned Behaviour has been widely used to explain and predict health behaviour. This posits that the degree to which an individual positively or negatively values a behaviour (termed 'direct attitude') is based upon consideration of the likelihood of a number of outcomes occurring (outcome expectancy) weighted by the perceived desirability of those outcomes (outcome evaluation). Outcome expectancy and outcome evaluation when multiplied form 'indirect attitude'. The study aimed to assess whether positive outcome expectancies of unprotected sex were more important for young adults with lower safe sex intentions, than those with safer sex intentions, and to isolate optimal outcomes for targeting through health promotion campaigns.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 120 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Nigeria 1 <1%
Unknown 117 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 23 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 16%
Student > Master 18 15%
Researcher 12 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 6%
Other 14 12%
Unknown 27 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 23 19%
Psychology 18 15%
Social Sciences 15 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 14 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 3%
Other 17 14%
Unknown 30 25%
Attention Score in Context

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 26 April 2013.
All research outputs
#6,345,081
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#6,496
of 15,296 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#68,795
of 291,719 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#98
of 277 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,296 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% 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 291,719 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 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 277 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 64% of its contemporaries.