↓ Skip to main content

MObile Technology for Improved Family Planning Services (MOTIF): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in Trials, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (90th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source
twitter
3 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
30 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
135 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
MObile Technology for Improved Family Planning Services (MOTIF): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial
Published in
Trials, January 2013
DOI 10.1186/1745-6215-14-427
Pubmed ID
Authors

Chris Smith, Uk Vannak, Ly Sokhey, Thoai D Ngo, Judy Gold, Khemrin Khut, Phil Edwards, Tung Rathavy, Caroline Free

Abstract

Providing women with contraceptive methods following abortion is important to reduce repeat abortion rates, yet evidence for effective post-abortion family planning interventions are limited. This protocol outlines the evaluation of a mobile phone-based intervention using voice messages to support post-abortion family planning in Cambodia.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 tweeters 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 135 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Unknown 133 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 35 26%
Researcher 24 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 11%
Student > Bachelor 12 9%
Lecturer 6 4%
Other 21 16%
Unknown 22 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 40 30%
Social Sciences 20 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 16 12%
Psychology 11 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 3%
Other 19 14%
Unknown 25 19%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 01 December 2015.
All research outputs
#1,649,948
of 17,360,236 outputs
Outputs from Trials
#589
of 4,581 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#25,721
of 273,091 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Trials
#7
of 84 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,360,236 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,581 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 273,091 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 84 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.