↓ Skip to main content

A cluster-randomized trial of task shifting and blood pressure control in Ghana: study protocol

Overview of attention for article published in Implementation Science, June 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (53rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
47 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
354 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
A cluster-randomized trial of task shifting and blood pressure control in Ghana: study protocol
Published in
Implementation Science, June 2014
DOI 10.1186/1748-5908-9-73
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gbenga Ogedegbe, Jacob Plange-Rhule, Joyce Gyamfi, William Chaplin, Michael Ntim, Kingsley Apusiga, Kiran Khurshid, Richard Cooper

Abstract

Countries in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) are experiencing an epidemic of cardiovascular disease (CVD) propelled by rapidly increasing rates of hypertension. Barriers to hypertension control in SSA include poor access to care and high out-of-pocket costs. Although SSA bears 24% of the global disease burden, it has only 3% of the global health workforce. Given such limited resources, cost-effective strategies, such as task shifting, are needed to mitigate the rising CVD epidemic in SSA. Ghana, a country in SSA with an established community health worker program integrated within a national health insurance scheme provides an ideal platform to evaluate implementation of the World Health Organization (WHO) task-shifting strategy. This study will evaluate the comparative effectiveness of the implementation of the WHO Package targeted at CV risk assessment versus provision of health insurance coverage, on blood pressure (BP) reduction.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 354 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 4 1%
Ghana 1 <1%
Indonesia 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 346 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 56 16%
Researcher 40 11%
Student > Bachelor 33 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 31 9%
Student > Postgraduate 24 7%
Other 68 19%
Unknown 102 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 90 25%
Nursing and Health Professions 49 14%
Social Sciences 29 8%
Psychology 14 4%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 9 3%
Other 53 15%
Unknown 110 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 25 July 2014.
All research outputs
#12,900,070
of 22,757,090 outputs
Outputs from Implementation Science
#1,334
of 1,721 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#105,714
of 228,693 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Implementation Science
#29
of 38 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,757,090 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,721 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.7. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% 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 228,693 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 38 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.