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 |
Understanding the relationship between stress, distress and healthy lifestyle behaviour: a qualitative study of patients and general practitioners
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Primary Care, November 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2296-14-166 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Suzanne H McKenzie, Mark F Harris |
| Abstract |
The process of initiating and maintaining healthy lifestyle behaviours is complex, includes a number of distinct phases and is not static. Theoretical models of behaviour change consider psychological constructs such as intention and self efficacy but do not clearly consider the role of stress or psychological distress. General practice based interventions addressing lifestyle behaviours have been demonstrated to be feasible and effective however it is not clear whether general practitioners (GPs) take psychological health into consideration when discussing lifestyle behaviours. This qualitative study explores GPs' and patients' perspectives about the relationship between external stressors, psychological distress and maintaining healthy lifestyle behaviours. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Norway | 1 | 33% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 104 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Colombia | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| South Africa | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 100 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 18 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 11 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 8 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 8 | 8% |
| Other | 21 | 20% |
| Unknown | 26 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 19 | 18% |
| Psychology | 19 | 18% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 8% |
| Social Sciences | 7 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 14 | 13% |
| Unknown | 34 | 33% |
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 02 February 2015.
All research outputs
#15,169,949
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from BMC Primary Care
#1,381
of 2,359 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#122,230
of 226,646 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Primary Care
#27
of 43 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,359 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% 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 226,646 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 43 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.