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 |
Measuring oral health literacy: a scoping review of existing tools
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Oral Health, December 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1472-6831-14-148 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Virginia Dickson-Swift, Amanda Kenny, Jane Farmer, Mark Gussy, Sarah Larkins |
| Abstract |
This article presents findings from a scoping review of tools used to measure oral health literacy. Internationally, interest in oral health literacy is driven by oral health disparities, particularly for disadvantaged groups, with conditions such as dental caries and periodontal disease contributing substantially to the global burden of disease. The increasing focus on measuring oral health literacy aligns with reasons for measuring broader health literacy, that is, by assessing oral health literacy, decisions can be made about instigating interventions at policy and practice level to improve individual and population level oral health. There are numerous tools available that measure oral health literacy using a range of indicators. |
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 | 2 | 40% |
| Australia | 2 | 40% |
| Unknown | 1 | 20% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 60% |
| Scientists | 1 | 20% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 217 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% |
| Bangladesh | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 214 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 30 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 23 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 20 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 16 | 7% |
| Researcher | 15 | 7% |
| Other | 48 | 22% |
| Unknown | 65 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 102 | 47% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 18 | 8% |
| Social Sciences | 10 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 2% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | <1% |
| Other | 14 | 6% |
| Unknown | 66 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 October 2015.
All research outputs
#3,072,042
of 23,577,761 outputs
Outputs from BMC Oral Health
#155
of 1,547 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#44,359
of 364,779 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Oral Health
#3
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,761 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,547 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 364,779 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 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.