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.
Twitter Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
The mPED randomized controlled clinical trial: applying mobile persuasive technologies to increase physical activity in sedentary women protocol
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Public Health, December 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2458-11-933 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yoshimi Fukuoka, Judith Komatsu, Larry Suarez, Eric Vittinghoff, William Haskell, Tina Noorishad, Kristin Pham |
| Abstract |
Despite the significant health benefits of regular physical activity, approximately half of American adults, particularly women and minorities, do not meet the current physical activity recommendations. Mobile phone technologies are readily available, easily accessible and may provide a potentially powerful tool for delivering physical activity interventions. However, we need to understand how to effectively apply these mobile technologies to increase and maintain physical activity in physically inactive women. The purpose of this paper is to describe the study design and protocol of the mPED (mobile phone based physical activity education) randomized controlled clinical trial that examines the efficacy of a 3-month mobile phone and pedometer based physical activity intervention and compares two different 6-month maintenance interventions. |
Twitter Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 5 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 233 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 2 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Portugal | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 228 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 44 | 19% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 42 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 29 | 12% |
| Researcher | 28 | 12% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 10 | 4% |
| Other | 46 | 20% |
| Unknown | 34 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 49 | 21% |
| Psychology | 24 | 10% |
| Social Sciences | 23 | 10% |
| Computer Science | 21 | 9% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 20 | 9% |
| Other | 53 | 23% |
| Unknown | 43 | 18% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 19 March 2012.
All research outputs
#2,265,193
of 22,663,150 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#2,602
of 14,743 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,694
of 242,494 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#23
of 200 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,663,150 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,743 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 well, scoring higher than 82% 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 242,494 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 92% of its contemporaries.
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 has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.