↓ Skip to main content

Using concept mapping in the knowledge-to-action process to compare stakeholder opinions on barriers to use of cancer screening among South Asians

Overview of attention for article published in Implementation Science, March 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
99 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
Using concept mapping in the knowledge-to-action process to compare stakeholder opinions on barriers to use of cancer screening among South Asians
Published in
Implementation Science, March 2013
DOI 10.1186/1748-5908-8-37
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rebecca Lobb, Andrew D Pinto, Aisha Lofters

Abstract

Using the knowledge-to-action (KTA) process, this study examined barriers to use of evidence-based interventions to improve early detection of cancer among South Asians from the perspective of multiple stakeholders.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 99 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 2%
Ghana 1 1%
India 1 1%
Australia 1 1%
Cambodia 1 1%
Canada 1 1%
Unknown 92 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 17 17%
Researcher 16 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 11%
Student > Bachelor 9 9%
Other 7 7%
Other 19 19%
Unknown 20 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 25%
Social Sciences 15 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 11%
Psychology 9 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 4%
Other 9 9%
Unknown 26 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 25 March 2013.
All research outputs
#12,580,762
of 22,701,287 outputs
Outputs from Implementation Science
#1,286
of 1,719 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#98,861
of 197,511 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Implementation Science
#27
of 35 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,701,287 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,719 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.7. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% 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 197,511 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 35 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.