↓ Skip to main content

Do residents’ perceptions of being well-placed and objective presence of local amenities match? A case study in West Central Scotland, UK

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

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
7 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
90 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
Do residents’ perceptions of being well-placed and objective presence of local amenities match? A case study in West Central Scotland, UK
Published in
BMC Public Health, May 2013
DOI 10.1186/1471-2458-13-454
Pubmed ID
Authors

Laura Macdonald, Ade Kearns, Anne Ellaway

Abstract

Recently there has been growing interest in how neighbourhood features, such as the provision of local facilities and amenities, influence residents' health and well-being. Prior research has measured amenity provision through subjective measures (surveying residents' perceptions) or objective (GIS mapping of distance) methods. The latter may provide a more accurate measure of physical access, but residents may not use local amenities if they do not perceive them as 'local'. We believe both subjective and objective measures should be explored, and use West Central Scotland data to investigate correspondence between residents' subjective assessments of how well-placed they are for everyday amenities (food stores, primary and secondary schools, libraries, pharmacies, public recreation), and objective GIS-modelled measures, and examine correspondence by various sub-groups.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 tweeters 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 90 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Canada 1 1%
Unknown 88 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 19 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 20%
Researcher 16 18%
Student > Postgraduate 6 7%
Student > Bachelor 4 4%
Other 9 10%
Unknown 18 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 16 18%
Medicine and Dentistry 13 14%
Psychology 9 10%
Environmental Science 5 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 4%
Other 20 22%
Unknown 23 26%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 19 June 2014.
All research outputs
#3,423,767
of 12,372,633 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#3,818
of 8,418 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#39,968
of 144,638 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#17
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,372,633 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 8,418 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% 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 144,638 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 33 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.