↓ Skip to main content

Designing a handwashing station for infrastructure-restricted communities in Bangladesh using the integrated behavioural model for water, sanitation and hygiene interventions (IBM-WASH)

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

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
81 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
248 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
Designing a handwashing station for infrastructure-restricted communities in Bangladesh using the integrated behavioural model for water, sanitation and hygiene interventions (IBM-WASH)
Published in
BMC Public Health, September 2013
DOI 10.1186/1471-2458-13-877
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kristyna RS Hulland, Elli Leontsini, Robert Dreibelbis, Leanne Unicomb, Aasma Afroz, Notan Chandra Dutta, Fosiul Alam Nizame, Stephen P Luby, Pavani K Ram, Peter J Winch

Abstract

In Bangladesh diarrhoeal disease and respiratory infections contribute significantly to morbidity and mortality. Handwashing with soap reduces the risk of infection; however, handwashing rates in infrastructure-restricted settings remain low. Handwashing stations--a dedicated, convenient location where both soap and water are available for handwashing--are associated with improved handwashing practices. Our aim was to identify a locally feasible and acceptable handwashing station that enabled frequent handwashing for two subsequent randomized trials testing the health effects of this behaviour.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 248 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Indonesia 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Nigeria 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 243 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 58 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 40 16%
Researcher 37 15%
Student > Bachelor 22 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 4%
Other 36 15%
Unknown 45 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 33 13%
Social Sciences 29 12%
Environmental Science 27 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 24 10%
Engineering 23 9%
Other 53 21%
Unknown 59 24%
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 08 March 2020.
All research outputs
#6,080,310
of 22,725,280 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#6,281
of 14,801 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#53,587
of 202,772 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#133
of 284 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,725,280 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,801 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 gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% 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 202,772 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 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 284 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 52% of its contemporaries.