↓ Skip to main content

The quantity, quality and characteristics of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australian mentoring literature: a systematic review

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, December 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (56th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
26 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
123 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
The quantity, quality and characteristics of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australian mentoring literature: a systematic review
Published in
BMC Public Health, December 2014
DOI 10.1186/1471-2458-14-1263
Pubmed ID
Authors

Roxanne Bainbridge, Komla Tsey, Janya McCalman, Simon Towle

Abstract

Mentoring is a key predictor of empowerment and prospectively a game changer in the quest to improve health inequities. This systematic review reports on the state of evidence on mentoring for Indigenous Australians by identifying the quantity, nature, quality and characteristics of mentoring publications.

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 123 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Unknown 120 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 23 19%
Researcher 16 13%
Student > Bachelor 10 8%
Other 7 6%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 6%
Other 27 22%
Unknown 33 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 21 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 16 13%
Psychology 13 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 8%
Arts and Humanities 4 3%
Other 19 15%
Unknown 40 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 07 March 2022.
All research outputs
#6,301,927
of 23,283,373 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#6,534
of 15,176 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#84,392
of 357,470 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#84
of 194 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,283,373 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,176 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% 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 357,470 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 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 194 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% of its contemporaries.