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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Implementing a provider-initiated testing and counselling (PITC) intervention in Cape town, South Africa: a process evaluation using the normalisation process model
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Implementation Science, August 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1748-5908-8-97 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Natalie Leon, Simon Lewin, Catherine Mathews |
| Abstract |
Provider-initiated HIV testing and counselling (PITC) increases HIV testing rates in most settings, but its effect on testing rates varies considerably. This paper reports the findings of a process evaluation of a controlled trial of PITC for people with sexually transmitted infections (STI) attending publicly funded clinics in a low-resource setting in South Africa, where the trial results were lower than anticipated compared to the standard Voluntary Counselling and Testing (VCT) approach. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| South Africa | 3 | 75% |
| United States | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 2 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 2 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 179 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Botswana | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 174 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 36 | 20% |
| Researcher | 33 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 22 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 11 | 6% |
| Lecturer | 10 | 6% |
| Other | 37 | 21% |
| Unknown | 30 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 55 | 31% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 28 | 16% |
| Social Sciences | 21 | 12% |
| Psychology | 8 | 4% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 5 | 3% |
| Other | 26 | 15% |
| Unknown | 36 | 20% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 21 January 2019.
All research outputs
#13,391,391
of 22,721,584 outputs
Outputs from Implementation Science
#1,412
of 1,721 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#105,412
of 199,735 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Implementation Science
#28
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,721,584 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,721 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.7. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% 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 199,735 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.