↓ Skip to main content

The development of health literacy in patients with a long-term health condition: the health literacy pathway model

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, February 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
51 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
137 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
371 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
The development of health literacy in patients with a long-term health condition: the health literacy pathway model
Published in
BMC Public Health, February 2012
DOI 10.1186/1471-2458-12-130
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michelle Edwards, Fiona Wood, Myfanwy Davies, Adrian Edwards

Abstract

Inadequate health literacy has been associated with poor management of long-term health conditions and has been identified as a key social determinant of health outcomes. However, little is understood about how health literacy might develop over time or the processes by which people may become more health literate. Our objectives were to describe how patients with a long-term condition practice health literacy in the management of their health and communication with health professionals, how they become more health literate over time and their experience of using health services. We also sought to identify and describe the motivations, facilitators and barriers in the practice of health literacy in healthcare consultations.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 51 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 371 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 5 1%
Portugal 2 <1%
Denmark 2 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Malaysia 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 357 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 76 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 52 14%
Student > Bachelor 42 11%
Researcher 33 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 30 8%
Other 85 23%
Unknown 53 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 103 28%
Nursing and Health Professions 77 21%
Social Sciences 56 15%
Psychology 20 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 2%
Other 39 11%
Unknown 70 19%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 32. 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 06 May 2014.
All research outputs
#1,042,631
of 22,663,150 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#1,128
of 14,741 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#7,538
of 250,850 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#11
of 226 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,663,150 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,741 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 250,850 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 226 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 95% of its contemporaries.