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 |
Linking Infectious and Narcology Care (LINC) in Russia: design, intervention and implementation protocol
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Addiction Science & Clinical Practice, May 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13722-016-0058-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Natalia Gnatienko, Steve C. Han, Evgeny Krupitsky, Elena Blokhina, Carly Bridden, Christine E. Chaisson, Debbie M. Cheng, Alexander Y. Walley, Anita Raj, Jeffrey H. Samet |
| Abstract |
Russia and Eastern Europe have one of the fastest growing HIV epidemics in the world. While countries in this region have implemented HIV testing within addiction treatment systems, linkage to HIV care from these settings is not yet standard practice. The Linking Infectious and Narcology Care (LINC) intervention utilized peer-led strengths-based case management to motivate HIV-infected patients in addiction treatment to obtain HIV care. This paper describes the protocol of a randomized controlled trial evaluating the effectiveness of the LINC intervention in St. Petersburg, Russia. Participants (n = 349) were recruited from the inpatient wards at the City Addiction Hospital in St. Petersburg, Russia. After completing a baseline assessment, participants were randomly assigned to receive either the LINC intervention or standard of care. Participants returned for research assessments 6 and 12 months post-baseline. Primary outcomes were assessed via chart review at HIV treatment locations. LINC holds the potential to offer an effective approach to coordinating HIV care for people who inject drugs in Russia. The LINC intervention utilizes existing systems of care in Russia, minimizing adoption of substantial infrastructure for implementation. Trial Registration NCT01612455. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 67% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 33% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 124 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 124 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 21 | 17% |
| Researcher | 15 | 12% |
| Other | 11 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 8% |
| Librarian | 5 | 4% |
| Other | 18 | 15% |
| Unknown | 44 | 35% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 36 | 29% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 13 | 10% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 3% |
| Psychology | 4 | 3% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 16 | 13% |
| Unknown | 49 | 40% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 20 May 2016.
All research outputs
#15,089,820
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Addiction Science & Clinical Practice
#310
of 487 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#156,670
of 312,462 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Addiction Science & Clinical Practice
#3
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 487 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.6. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% 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 312,462 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.