↓ Skip to main content

The Antibiotic Guardian campaign: a qualitative evaluation of an online pledge-based system focused on making better use of antibiotics

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, July 2017
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 (89th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
34 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
36 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
138 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
The Antibiotic Guardian campaign: a qualitative evaluation of an online pledge-based system focused on making better use of antibiotics
Published in
BMC Public Health, July 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12889-017-4552-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Joanna May Kesten, Alex Bhattacharya, Diane Ashiru-Oredope, Maya Gobin, Suzanne Audrey

Abstract

The Antibiotic Guardian Campaign was developed to increase commitment to reducing Antimicrobial Resistance (AMR), change behaviour and increase knowledge through an online pledge system for healthcare professionals and members of the public to become Antibiotic Guardians (AG). This qualitative evaluation aimed to understand AG experiences of the campaign and perceived impact on behaviour. Ninety-four AGs (48 via a survey and 46 who had agreed to future contact) were invited to participate in a telephone semi-structured interview. The sample was based on self-identification as a healthcare professional or a member of the public, pledge group (e.g. adults, primary care prescribers etc.), pledge and gender. Interviews explored how participants became aware of the campaign, reasons for joining, pledge choices, responses to joining and views about the campaign's implementation. Interviews were analysed using the Framework Method. Twenty-two AGs (10 healthcare professionals and 12 members of the public) were interviewed. AGs became aware of the campaign through professional networks and social media, and were motivated to join by personal and professional concern for AMR. Choice of pledge group and pledge were attributed to relevance and potential impact on AMR and the behaviour of others through pledge enactment and promotion of the campaign. Most AGs could not recall their pledge unprompted. Most felt they fulfilled their pledge, although this reflected either behaviour change or the pledge reinforcing pre-existing behaviour. The campaign triggered AGs to reflect on AMR related behaviour and reinforced pre-existing beliefs. Several AGs promoted the campaign to others. Responding collectively as part of the campaign was thought to have a greater impact than individual action. However, limited campaign visibility was observed and the campaign was perceived to have restricted ability to reach those unaware of AMR. AGs were motivated to reduce AMR and most felt they fulfilled their pledges although for many this appeared to be through reinforcement of existing behaviours. We recommend that the campaign engages those without pre-existing knowledge of AMR by increasing its visibility, capitalising on the diffusion of its message and including more awareness-raising content for those with limited AMR knowledge.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 34 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 138 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 138 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 35 25%
Student > Bachelor 19 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 6%
Researcher 8 6%
Other 12 9%
Unknown 43 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 30 22%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 9 7%
Social Sciences 8 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 5%
Other 27 20%
Unknown 45 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 21. 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 12 June 2023.
All research outputs
#1,740,067
of 24,972,914 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#1,942
of 16,630 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#33,078
of 317,964 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#37
of 214 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,972,914 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 16,630 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 317,964 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 214 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.