↓ Skip to main content

Listening to diverse community voices: the tensions of responding to community expectations in developing a male circumcision program for HIV prevention in Papua New Guinea

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

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (53rd percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
94 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
Listening to diverse community voices: the tensions of responding to community expectations in developing a male circumcision program for HIV prevention in Papua New Guinea
Published in
BMC Public Health, August 2013
DOI 10.1186/1471-2458-13-749
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anna Tynan, Peter S Hill, Angela Kelly, Martha Kupul, Herick Aeno, Richard Naketrumb, Peter Siba, John Kaldor, Andrew Vallely, for the Male Circumcision Acceptability and Impact Study (MCAIS) team

Abstract

The success of health programs is influenced not only by their acceptability but also their ability to meet and respond to community expectations of service delivery. The World Health Organization (WHO) and the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS) have recommended medical male circumcision (MC) as an essential component of comprehensive HIV prevention programs in high burden settings. This study investigated community-level perceptions of MC for HIV prevention in Papua New Guinea (PNG), a setting where diverse traditional and contemporary forms of penile foreskin cutting practices have been described.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 94 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 1%
Peru 1 1%
Switzerland 1 1%
Unknown 91 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 16 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 17%
Researcher 11 12%
Librarian 6 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 5%
Other 21 22%
Unknown 19 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 24 26%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 13%
Social Sciences 12 13%
Psychology 4 4%
Unspecified 4 4%
Other 16 17%
Unknown 22 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 17 August 2020.
All research outputs
#6,721,987
of 23,849,058 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#7,012
of 15,435 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#55,580
of 199,749 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#115
of 256 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,849,058 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,435 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% 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 199,749 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 256 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 53% of its contemporaries.