↓ Skip to main content

Informing a culturally appropriate approach to oral health and dental care for pre-school refugee children: a community participatory study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Oral Health, June 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 (87th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
38 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
213 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
Informing a culturally appropriate approach to oral health and dental care for pre-school refugee children: a community participatory study
Published in
BMC Oral Health, June 2014
DOI 10.1186/1472-6831-14-69
Pubmed ID
Authors

Pam Nicol, Arwa Al-Hanbali, Nigel King, Linda Slack-Smith, Sarah Cherian

Abstract

Pre-school children in families of recently settled refugees often have very high rates of early childhood caries (ECC). ECC is associated with a high level of morbidity and is largely preventable, however effective culturally appropriate models of care are lacking. This study aimed to provide a deeper understanding of the refugee experience related to early oral health by exploring pre-school refugee families (i) understanding of ECC and child oral health, (ii) experiences of accessing dental services and (iii) barriers and enablers for achieving improved oral health. The knowledge gained will be critical to the development of effective early oral health programs in refugee children.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 213 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 209 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 41 19%
Student > Bachelor 22 10%
Student > Postgraduate 15 7%
Researcher 14 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 6%
Other 52 24%
Unknown 57 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 67 31%
Nursing and Health Professions 28 13%
Social Sciences 16 8%
Psychology 10 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 4 2%
Other 19 9%
Unknown 69 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 17 February 2016.
All research outputs
#2,695,901
of 22,757,090 outputs
Outputs from BMC Oral Health
#125
of 1,459 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#28,235
of 228,650 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Oral Health
#2
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,757,090 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,459 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 228,650 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 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.