↓ Skip to main content

Effect of a multi-faceted quality improvement intervention on inappropriate antibiotic use in children with non-bloody diarrhoea admitted to district hospitals in Kenya

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Pediatrics, November 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
134 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
Effect of a multi-faceted quality improvement intervention on inappropriate antibiotic use in children with non-bloody diarrhoea admitted to district hospitals in Kenya
Published in
BMC Pediatrics, November 2011
DOI 10.1186/1471-2431-11-109
Pubmed ID
Authors

Charles Opondo, Philip Ayieko, Stephen Ntoburi, John Wagai, Newton Opiyo, Grace Irimu, Elizabeth Allen, James Carpenter, Mike English

Abstract

There are few reports of interventions to reduce the common but irrational use of antibiotics for acute non-bloody diarrhoea amongst hospitalised children in low-income settings. We undertook a secondary analysis of data from an intervention comprising training of health workers, facilitation, supervision and face-to-face feedback, to assess whether it reduced inappropriate use of antibiotics in children with non-bloody diarrhoea and no co-morbidities requiring antibiotics, compared to a partial intervention comprising didactic training and written feedback only. This outcome was not a pre-specified end-point of the main trial.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 134 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 2 1%
Indonesia 1 <1%
Ireland 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Kenya 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 127 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 32 24%
Researcher 22 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 9%
Student > Bachelor 12 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 7%
Other 26 19%
Unknown 20 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 57 43%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 9 7%
Social Sciences 8 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 5%
Other 24 18%
Unknown 22 16%

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 01 January 2023.
All research outputs
#7,032,838
of 23,016,919 outputs
Outputs from BMC Pediatrics
#1,313
of 3,037 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#63,717
of 241,456 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Pediatrics
#18
of 37 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,016,919 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 3,037 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 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 241,456 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 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 37 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.