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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Prioritising between direct observation of therapy and case-finding interventions for tuberculosis: use of population impact measures
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medicine, December 2006
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1741-7015-4-35 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Richard F Heller, Islay Gemmell, Richard Edwards, Iain Buchan, Shally Awasthi, James A Volmink |
| Abstract |
Population impact measures (PIMs) have been developed as tools to help policy-makers with locally relevant decisions over health risks and benefits. This involves estimating and prioritizing potential benefits of interventions in specific populations. Using tuberculosis (TB) in India as an example, we examined the population impact of two interventions: direct observation of therapy and increasing case-finding. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 68 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 3 | 4% |
| United States | 3 | 4% |
| South Africa | 2 | 3% |
| Brazil | 1 | 1% |
| Philippines | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 58 | 85% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 14 | 21% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 16% |
| Researcher | 8 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 9% |
| Professor | 6 | 9% |
| Other | 17 | 25% |
| Unknown | 6 | 9% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 31 | 46% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 10% |
| Social Sciences | 7 | 10% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 4% |
| Psychology | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 7 | 10% |
| Unknown | 11 | 16% |
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 26 October 2010.
All research outputs
#7,454,951
of 22,790,780 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medicine
#2,590
of 3,421 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#41,954
of 156,417 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medicine
#7
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,790,780 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,421 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 43.5. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% 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 156,417 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.