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 |
Impact of communicative and critical health literacy on understanding of diabetes care and self-efficacy in diabetes management: a cross-sectional study of primary care in Japan
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Primary Care, March 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2296-14-40 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Machiko Inoue, Miyako Takahashi, Ichiro Kai |
| Abstract |
The role of a patient's functional health literacy (HL) has received much attention in the context of diabetes education, but researchers have not fully investigated the roles of communicative and critical HL, especially in primary care. Communicative HL is the skill to extract health information and derive meaning from different forms of communication, and to apply this information to changing circumstances. Critical HL allows the patient to critically analyze information and to use this information to achieve greater control over life events and situations. We examined how HL, particularly communicative and critical HL, is related to the patient's understanding of diabetes care and self-efficacy for diabetes management in primary care settings. We also examined the impact of patient-physician communication factors on these outcomes, taking HL into account. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 255 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 1% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | <1% |
| Ghana | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Taiwan | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 245 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 41 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 35 | 14% |
| Unspecified | 22 | 9% |
| Researcher | 22 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 19 | 7% |
| Other | 72 | 28% |
| Unknown | 44 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 66 | 26% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 43 | 17% |
| Social Sciences | 32 | 13% |
| Unspecified | 22 | 9% |
| Psychology | 15 | 6% |
| Other | 25 | 10% |
| Unknown | 52 | 20% |
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 27 June 2013.
All research outputs
#16,721,717
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from BMC Primary Care
#1,612
of 2,359 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#130,158
of 210,062 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Primary Care
#23
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 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 2,359 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% 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 210,062 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 32 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.