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 |
Can primary care data be used to monitor regional smoking prevalence? An analysis of The Health Improvement Network primary care data
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Public Health, October 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2458-11-773 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Tessa E Langley, Lisa C Szatkowski, Stephen Wythe, Sarah A Lewis |
| Abstract |
Accurate and timely regional data on smoking trends allow tobacco control interventions to be targeted at the areas most in need and facilitate the evaluation of such interventions. Electronic primary care databases have the potential to provide a valuable source of such data due to their size, continuity and the availability of socio-demographic data. UK electronic primary care data on smoking prevalence from The Health Improvement Network (THIN) have previously been validated at the national level, but may be less representative at the regional level due to reduced sample sizes. We investigated whether this database provides valid regional data and whether it can be used to compare smoking prevalence in different UK regions. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 35 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 7 | 19% |
| Other | 5 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 14% |
| Lecturer | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 4 | 11% |
| Unknown | 9 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 15 | 42% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 6% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 3% |
| Mathematics | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Unknown | 12 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 11 October 2011.
All research outputs
#20,147,309
of 22,653,392 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#13,778
of 14,735 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#124,726
of 135,640 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#193
of 200 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,653,392 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,735 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 135,640 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 200 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.