↓ Skip to main content

Analyzing the sources and nature of influence: how the Avahan program used evidence to influence HIV/AIDS prevention policy in India

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

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (55th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
97 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
Analyzing the sources and nature of influence: how the Avahan program used evidence to influence HIV/AIDS prevention policy in India
Published in
Implementation Science, April 2013
DOI 10.1186/1748-5908-8-44
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nhan T Tran, Sara C Bennett, Rituparna Bishnu, Suneeta Singh

Abstract

Major investments by development partners in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) often seek to develop a supportive policy environment. There is limited knowledge about the mechanisms that development partners use to influence government policy, or which mechanisms are effective. This study assessed the influence of Avahan, a large HIV/AIDS prevention program in India supported by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, on the development of HIV/AIDS policies in India, particularly the National AIDS Control Program III (NACP III).

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 2%
United States 1 1%
Unknown 94 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 22 23%
Student > Master 13 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 10%
Student > Bachelor 8 8%
Librarian 4 4%
Other 21 22%
Unknown 19 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 26 27%
Social Sciences 20 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 5%
Arts and Humanities 4 4%
Other 9 9%
Unknown 23 24%
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 23 May 2013.
All research outputs
#6,474,988
of 25,820,938 outputs
Outputs from Implementation Science
#1,021
of 1,822 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#50,872
of 210,660 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Implementation Science
#16
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,820,938 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,822 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.9. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% 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 210,660 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 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 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 55% of its contemporaries.