↓ Skip to main content

Culturally specific versus standard group cognitive behavioral therapy for smoking cessation among African Americans: an RCT protocol

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

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
32 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
Culturally specific versus standard group cognitive behavioral therapy for smoking cessation among African Americans: an RCT protocol
Published in
BMC Psychology, August 2013
DOI 10.1186/2050-7283-1-15
Pubmed ID
Authors

Monica Webb Hooper, Ramona Larry, Kolawole Okuyemi, Ken Resnicow, Noella A Dietz, Robert G Robinson, Michael H Antoni

Abstract

African American smokers experience disproportionately higher rates of tobacco-related illnesses compared to Caucasians. It has been suggested that interventions targeted to specific racial/ethnic groups (i.e., culturally specific) are needed; however, the literature examining the efficacy of culturally specific interventions is equivocal. Moreover, there are few descriptions of methods used to create these interventions. The main aim of this study is to test the efficacy of a culturally specific smoking cessation intervention among African Americans.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 32 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 31%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 13%
Researcher 3 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 6%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 9 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 10 31%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 13%
Social Sciences 2 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 6%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 3%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 11 34%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 09 September 2013.
All research outputs
#2,471,814
of 4,655,094 outputs
Outputs from BMC Psychology
#65
of 92 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#47,556
of 95,538 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Psychology
#5
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 4,655,094 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 92 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.6. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% 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 95,538 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.