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 |
Assisting an Australian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander person with gambling problems: a Delphi study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Psychology, August 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s40359-017-0196-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kathy S Bond, Katrina M. Dart, Anthony F. Jorm, Claire M. Kelly, Betty A. Kitchener, Nicola J. Reavley |
| Abstract |
Gambling problems appear to be more prevalent in the Australian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander population than in the non-Indigenous population. Although gambling harms can be significant, treatment-seeking rates are low. The Delphi expert consensus method was used to develop a set of guidelines on how a family or community member can assist an Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander person with gambling problems. Building on a previous systematic review of websites, books and journal articles a questionnaire was developed that contained items about the knowledge, skills and actions needed for supporting an Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander person with gambling problems. These items were rated over three rounds by an expert panel comprising professionals who provide treatment to or conduct research with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people with gambling problems. A total of 22 experts rated 407 helping statements according to whether they thought the statements should be included in these guidelines. There were 225 helping statements that were endorsed by at least 90% of participants. These endorsed statements were used to develop the guidelines. Experts were able to reach substantial consensus on how someone can recognise the signs of gambling problems and support an Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander person to change. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 44 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unspecified | 7 | 16% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 5% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 5% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 2 | 5% |
| Unknown | 25 | 57% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unspecified | 7 | 16% |
| Psychology | 5 | 11% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 5% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 2% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 2 | 5% |
| Unknown | 26 | 59% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 03 September 2017.
All research outputs
#4,321,969
of 23,881,329 outputs
Outputs from BMC Psychology
#305
of 866 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#73,852
of 319,354 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Psychology
#8
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,881,329 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 866 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% 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 319,354 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 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.