↓ Skip to main content

A program to respond to otitis media in remote Australian Aboriginal communities: a qualitative investigation of parent perspectives

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Pediatrics, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (61st percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
160 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 program to respond to otitis media in remote Australian Aboriginal communities: a qualitative investigation of parent perspectives
Published in
BMC Pediatrics, March 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12887-018-1081-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Caroline Jones, Mridula Sharma, Samantha Harkus, Catherine McMahon, Mele Taumoepeau, Katherine Demuth, Karen Mattock, Lee Rosas, Raelene Wing, Sulabha Pawar, Anne Hampshire

Abstract

Indigenous infants and children in Australia, especially in remote communities, experience early and chronic otitis media (OM) which is difficult to treat and has lifelong impacts in health and education. The LiTTLe Program (Learning to Talk, Talking to Learn) aimed to increase infants' access to spoken language input, teach parents to manage health and hearing problems, and support children's school readiness. This paper aimed to explore caregivers' views about this inclusive, parent-implemented early childhood program for 0-3 years in an Aboriginal community health context. Data from in-depth, semi-structured interviews with 9 caregivers of 12 children who had participated in the program from one remote Aboriginal community in the Northern Territory are presented. Data were analysed thematically. Caregivers provided overall views on the program. In addition, three key areas of focus in the program are also presented here: speech and language, hearing health, and school readiness. Caregivers were positive about the interactive speech and language strategies in the program, except for some strategies which some parents found alien or difficult: such as talking slowly, following along with the child's topic, using parallel talk, or baby talk. Children's hearing was considered by caregivers to be important for understanding people, enjoying music, and detecting environmental sounds including signs of danger. Caregivers provided perspectives on the utility of sign language and its benefits for communicating with infants and young children with hearing loss, and the difficulty of getting young community children to wear a conventional hearing aid. Caregivers were strongly of the opinion that the program had helped prepare children for school through familiarising their child with early literacy activities and resources, as well as school routines. But caregivers differed as to whether they thought the program should have been located at the school itself. The caregivers generally reported positive views about the LiTTLe Program, and also drew attention to areas for improvement. The perspectives gathered may serve to guide other cross-sector collaborations across health and education to respond to OM among children at risk for OM-related disability in speech and language development.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 160 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 160 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 22 14%
Student > Master 19 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 15 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 8%
Other 8 5%
Other 33 21%
Unknown 50 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 30 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 16 10%
Psychology 13 8%
Social Sciences 9 6%
Linguistics 7 4%
Other 28 18%
Unknown 57 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 09 April 2018.
All research outputs
#7,232,623
of 23,026,672 outputs
Outputs from BMC Pediatrics
#1,338
of 3,039 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#127,104
of 331,974 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Pediatrics
#62
of 99 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,026,672 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,039 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% 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 331,974 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 61% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 99 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.