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 |
Promoting action control and coping planning to improve hand hygiene
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Public Health, September 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12889-015-2295-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Benjamín Reyes Fernández, Sonia Lippke, Nina Knoll, Emanuel Blanca Moya, Ralf Schwarzer |
| Abstract |
We examined a brief educational intervention addressing hand hygiene self-regulatory mechanisms, and evaluated which psychological mechanisms may lead to hand hygiene behaviours. Two hundred forty two students (mean age = 21 years, SD = 3.9) received either an experimental (n = 149) or a control condition on action control and planning (n = 93). Hand hygiene, coping planning, and action control were measured at baseline and six weeks later. By applying repeated measures ANOVA, we compared the experimental condition addressing planning to perform hand hygiene with a control condition. Additionally, working mechanisms were evaluated by means of mediation analysis. The intervention had an effect on action control, as reflected by a time by treatment interaction. The direct effect of the intervention on behaviour was, however, non-significant. Changes in action control led to changes in coping planning. These social-cognitive changes mediated the effect of intervention on behaviour, after controlling for gender, baseline behaviour, and classroom membership. In spite of the associations between the intervention and self-regulatory strategies, no direct effect was found of the intervention on behaviour. Further research on how to increase hand sanitizing, involving enviromental characteristics, is required. The intervention led only indirectly to an improvement of hand hygiene via changes in self-regulatory factors. Results indicate the importance of promoting action control and coping planning to initiate changes in hand hygienic behaviours. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 21 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Professor | 4 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 9% |
| Unknown | 12 | 55% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 5 | 23% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 5% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 5% |
| Sports and Recreations | 1 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 12 | 55% |
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 25 September 2015.
All research outputs
#15,347,611
of 22,829,083 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#11,344
of 14,871 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#161,015
of 274,965 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#203
of 275 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,829,083 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,871 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 16th percentile – i.e., 16% 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 274,965 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 275 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.