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 |
Observer ratings of neighborhoods: comparison of two methods
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Public Health, October 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2458-13-1024 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Elena M Andresen, Theodore K Malmstrom, Mario Schootman, Fredric D Wolinsky, J Philip Miller, Douglas K Miller |
| Abstract |
Although neighborhood characteristics have important relationships with health outcomes, direct observation involves imperfect measurement. The African American Health (AAH) study included two observer neighborhood rating systems (5-item Krause and 18-item AAH Neighborhood Assessment Scale [NAS]), initially fielded at two different waves. Good measurement characteristics were previously shown for both, but there was more rater variability than desired. In 2010 both measures were re-fielded together, with enhanced training and field methods implemented to decrease rater variability while maintaining psychometric properties. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 33 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 11 | 32% |
| Researcher | 8 | 24% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 4 | 12% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 3 | 9% |
| Unknown | 4 | 12% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 24% |
| Social Sciences | 7 | 21% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 9% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 6% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 4 | 12% |
| Unknown | 8 | 24% |
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 20 November 2013.
All research outputs
#18,354,532
of 22,731,677 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#12,803
of 14,808 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#158,121
of 212,669 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#263
of 292 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,731,677 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,808 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% 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 212,669 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 292 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.