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 |
Implementing effective hygiene promotion: lessons from the process evaluation of an intervention to promote handwashing with soap in rural India
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Public Health, November 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2458-14-1179 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Divya Rajaraman, Kiruba Sankar Varadharajan, Katie Greenland, Val Curtis, Raja Kumar, Wolf-Peter Schmidt, Robert Aunger, Adam Biran |
| Abstract |
An intervention trial of the 'SuperAmma' village-level intervention to promote handwashing with soap (HWWS) in rural India demonstrated substantial increases in HWWS amongst the target population. We carried out a process evaluation to assess the implementation of the intervention and the evidence that it had changed the perceived benefits and social norms associated with HWWS. The evaluation also aimed to inform the design of a streamlined shorter intervention and estimate scale up costs. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 50% |
| Pakistan | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 138 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Indonesia | 1 | <1% |
| India | 1 | <1% |
| Colombia | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 135 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 27 | 20% |
| Researcher | 23 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 7% |
| Other | 9 | 7% |
| Other | 32 | 23% |
| Unknown | 27 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 35 | 25% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 18 | 13% |
| Environmental Science | 14 | 10% |
| Social Sciences | 7 | 5% |
| Engineering | 6 | 4% |
| Other | 24 | 17% |
| Unknown | 34 | 25% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 March 2015.
All research outputs
#14,553,567
of 23,306,612 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#10,568
of 15,196 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#195,262
of 365,509 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#168
of 240 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,306,612 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,196 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.0. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% 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 365,509 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 240 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.