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 |
Ethical issues evolving from patients’ perspectives on compulsory screening for syphilis and voluntary screening for cervical cancer in Kenya
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Ethics, March 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1472-6939-15-27 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Dickens S Omondi Aduda, Nhlanhla Mkhize |
| Abstract |
Public health aims to provide universal safety and progressive opportunities to populations to realise their highest level of health through prevention of disease, its progression or transmission. Screening asymptomatic individuals to detect early unapparent conditions is an important public health intervention strategy. It may be designed to be compulsory or voluntary depending on the epidemiological characteristics of the disease. Integrated screening, including for both syphilis and cancer of the cervix, is a core component of the national reproductive health program in Kenya. Screening for syphilis is compulsory while it is voluntary for cervical cancer. Participants' perspectives of either form of screening approach provide the necessary contextual information that clarifies mundane community concerns. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Kenya | 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 147 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Ethiopia | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Tanzania, United Republic of | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 144 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 29 | 20% |
| Researcher | 19 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 17 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 12 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 11 | 7% |
| Other | 26 | 18% |
| Unknown | 33 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 37 | 25% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 21 | 14% |
| Social Sciences | 20 | 14% |
| Psychology | 8 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 2% |
| Other | 20 | 14% |
| Unknown | 38 | 26% |
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 30 March 2014.
All research outputs
#16,585,096
of 24,473,185 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Ethics
#864
of 1,051 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#136,486
of 229,794 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Ethics
#19
of 25 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,473,185 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,051 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.9. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% 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 229,794 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 25 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.