↓ Skip to main content

A comparison of the effectiveness of three parenting programmes in improving parenting skills, parent mental-well being and children's behaviour when implemented on a large scale in community…

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, December 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
16 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
196 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 comparison of the effectiveness of three parenting programmes in improving parenting skills, parent mental-well being and children's behaviour when implemented on a large scale in community settings in 18 English local authorities: the parenting early intervention pathfinder (PEIP)
Published in
BMC Public Health, December 2011
DOI 10.1186/1471-2458-11-962
Pubmed ID
Authors

Geoff Lindsay, Steve Strand, Hilton Davis

Abstract

There is growing evidence that parenting programmes can improve parenting skills and thereby the behaviour of children exhibiting or at risk of developing antisocial behaviour. Given the high prevalence of childhood behaviour problems the task is to develop large scale application of effective programmes. The aim of this study was to evaluate the UK government funded implementation of the Parenting Early Intervention Pathfinder (PEIP). This involved the large scale rolling out of three programmes to parents of children 8-13 years in 18 local authorities (LAs) over a 2 year period.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 16 tweeters 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 196 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 3 2%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 192 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 36 18%
Researcher 29 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 27 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 20 10%
Student > Bachelor 17 9%
Other 39 20%
Unknown 28 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 60 31%
Medicine and Dentistry 40 20%
Social Sciences 32 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 2%
Other 16 8%
Unknown 34 17%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. 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 14 July 2014.
All research outputs
#931,722
of 13,778,033 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#1,017
of 9,513 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#11,389
of 211,336 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#46
of 637 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,778,033 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,513 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 211,336 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 637 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.