↓ Skip to main content

Working with men to prevent intimate partner violence in a conflict-affected setting: a pilot cluster randomized controlled trial in rural Côte d’Ivoire

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, April 2014
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 (83rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
10 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
102 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
292 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
Working with men to prevent intimate partner violence in a conflict-affected setting: a pilot cluster randomized controlled trial in rural Côte d’Ivoire
Published in
BMC Public Health, April 2014
DOI 10.1186/1471-2458-14-339
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mazeda Hossain, Cathy Zimmerman, Ligia Kiss, Tanya Abramsky, Drissa Kone, Monika Bakayoko-Topolska, Jeannie Annan, Heidi Lehmann, Charlotte Watts

Abstract

Evidence from armed conflict settings points to high levels of intimate partner violence (IPV) against women. Current knowledge on how to prevent IPV is limited-especially within war-affected settings. To inform prevention programming on gender-based violence in settings affected by conflict, we evaluated the impact of adding a targeted men's intervention to a community-based prevention programme in Côte d'Ivoire.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 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 292 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Malaysia 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Sierra Leone 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 286 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 48 16%
Student > Master 47 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 37 13%
Student > Bachelor 19 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 18 6%
Other 42 14%
Unknown 81 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 65 22%
Medicine and Dentistry 38 13%
Psychology 29 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 24 8%
Arts and Humanities 11 4%
Other 36 12%
Unknown 89 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 January 2024.
All research outputs
#4,217,960
of 25,815,269 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#4,923
of 17,854 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#39,404
of 242,367 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#66
of 264 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,815,269 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 17,854 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% 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 242,367 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 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 264 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.