↓ Skip to main content

Are youth mentoring programs good value-for-money? An evaluation of the Big Brothers Big Sisters Melbourne Program

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, January 2009
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
29 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
83 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
Are youth mentoring programs good value-for-money? An evaluation of the Big Brothers Big Sisters Melbourne Program
Published in
BMC Public Health, January 2009
DOI 10.1186/1471-2458-9-41
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marjory L Moodie, Jane Fisher

Abstract

The Big Brothers Big Sisters (BBBS) program matches vulnerable young people with a trained, supervised adult volunteer as mentor. The young people are typically seriously disadvantaged, with multiple psychosocial problems.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 83 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 2%
Israel 1 1%
Philippines 1 1%
Germany 1 1%
Unknown 78 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 14%
Student > Master 10 12%
Student > Bachelor 9 11%
Researcher 7 8%
Other 18 22%
Unknown 15 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 22 27%
Social Sciences 20 24%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 8%
Business, Management and Accounting 5 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 4%
Other 8 10%
Unknown 18 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 21. 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 15 February 2018.
All research outputs
#1,526,848
of 22,713,403 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#1,667
of 14,789 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,603
of 170,240 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#6
of 45 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,713,403 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,789 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 170,240 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 45 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.