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 |
Development of a technical assistance framework for building organizational capacity of health programs in resource-limited settings
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Health Services Research, September 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1472-6963-14-399 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
E Michael Reyes, Anjali Sharma, Kate K Thomas, Chuck Kuehn, José Rafael Morales |
| Abstract |
Little information exists on the technical assistance needs of local indigenous organizations charged with managing HIV care and treatment programs funded by the US President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR). This paper describes the methods used to adapt the Primary Care Assessment Tool (PCAT) framework, which has successfully strengthened HIV primary care services in the US, into one that could strengthen the capacity of local partners to deliver priority health programs in resource-constrained settings by identifying their specific technical assistance needs. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 60% |
| Canada | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 1 | 20% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 102 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 2 | 2% |
| South Africa | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 98 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Doctoral Student | 17 | 17% |
| Researcher | 16 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 12 | 12% |
| Other | 9 | 9% |
| Other | 11 | 11% |
| Unknown | 25 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 22 | 22% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 17 | 17% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 9 | 9% |
| Psychology | 6 | 6% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 4 | 4% |
| Other | 16 | 16% |
| Unknown | 28 | 27% |
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 21 October 2014.
All research outputs
#13,180,774
of 22,765,347 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#4,441
of 7,618 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#115,528
of 249,467 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#84
of 139 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,765,347 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,618 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% 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 249,467 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 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 139 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.