↓ Skip to main content

HIV and infant feeding in Malawi: public health simplicity in complex social and cultural contexts

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, August 2012
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 (85th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
12 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
125 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
HIV and infant feeding in Malawi: public health simplicity in complex social and cultural contexts
Published in
BMC Public Health, August 2012
DOI 10.1186/1471-2458-12-700
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jacqueline R Chinkonde, Marit Helene Hem, Johanne Sundby

Abstract

The question of when and how to best wean infants born to mothers with HIV requires complex answers. There are clinical guidelines on best approaches but limitations persist when applying them in diverse low-income settings. In such settings, infant-feeding practices are not only dependent on individual women's choices but are also subject to social and cultural pressures. However, when developing infant-feeding policies little attention has been paid to these pressures, even though they may yield useful empirical knowledge on the various forces that shape the infant-feeding dilemmas confronting women with HIV. This study aimed to a) identify the infant-feeding challenges that women with HIV faced when they were advised to wean their children at an early age of six months and b) explore how the women adhered to their infant-feeding options while facing and managing these challenges.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 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 125 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Australia 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Unknown 123 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 28 22%
Researcher 21 17%
Student > Doctoral Student 13 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 9%
Student > Bachelor 10 8%
Other 27 22%
Unknown 15 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 38 30%
Nursing and Health Professions 28 22%
Social Sciences 18 14%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 4%
Psychology 5 4%
Other 13 10%
Unknown 18 14%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 September 2012.
All research outputs
#1,784,389
of 12,372,633 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#2,058
of 8,418 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,922
of 126,400 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#19
of 110 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,372,633 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,418 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% 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 126,400 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 110 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.