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 |
Is health coaching effective in changing the health status and behaviour of prisoners?—a systematic review protocol
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Systematic Reviews, July 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13643-017-0524-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Nadja Almondes, Denise Downie, Ayse B. Cinar, Derek Richards, Ruth Freeman |
| Abstract |
This is a protocol for a systematic review of the impact of health coaching on changing the health behaviour of offenders. Prisoners are more likely to suffer from health-related issues when compared to the general population. Health coaching has been shown to influence health outcomes of patients with chronic conditions. This review, therefore, aims to assess the effectiveness of health coaching interventions on the health of adolescent and adult offenders in custodial institutions. We plan to conduct a systematic review of the current literature on health coaching interventions delivered in the prison setting. We will include randomised controlled trials and observational studies that compare health coaching to the usual care or other alternative interventions. The ideal interventions will be delivered either by health professionals or peer coaches, and the outcomes extracted in the data collection will be disease-specific, clients' life and self-management skills, behavioural and psychosocial outcomes. If appropriate, a meta-analysis of the data collected will be carried out on the last stage of the review. This systematic review will identify and gather evidence on the impact of health coaching interventions delivered in the prison setting and can function as a supporting material for health professionals, prison staff, the healthcare system, and public health departments when considering delivering health coaching. PROSPERO CRD42016053237 . |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 1 | 50% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 77 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 77 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 12 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 9% |
| Researcher | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 13 | 17% |
| Unknown | 27 | 35% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 10 | 13% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 10 | 13% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 5 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 15 | 19% |
| Unknown | 30 | 39% |
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 05 July 2017.
All research outputs
#13,559,942
of 22,985,065 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Reviews
#1,431
of 2,005 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#159,644
of 313,820 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Reviews
#36
of 51 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,985,065 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 2,005 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.8. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% 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 313,820 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 51 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.