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 |
Cost-effectiveness of a telephone-delivered education programme to prevent early childhood caries in a disadvantaged area: a cohort study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMJ Open, May 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1136/bmjopen-2013-002579 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Margaret Pukallus, Kathryn Plonka, Sanjeewa Kularatna, Louisa Gordon, Adrian G Barnett, Laurence Walsh, W Kim Seow |
| Abstract |
Early childhood caries is a highly destructive dental disease which is compounded by the need for young children to be treated under general anaesthesia. In Australia, there are long waiting periods for treatment at public hospitals. In this paper, we examined the costs and patient outcomes of a prevention programme for early childhood caries to assess its value for government services. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 3 | 43% |
| Unknown | 4 | 57% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 6 | 86% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 14% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 78 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 77 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 16 | 21% |
| Researcher | 10 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 15 | 19% |
| Unknown | 17 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 27 | 35% |
| Social Sciences | 6 | 8% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 5 | 6% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 4% |
| Psychology | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 12 | 15% |
| Unknown | 22 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 15 December 2016.
All research outputs
#4,192,244
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from BMJ Open
#7,658
of 25,589 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#34,275
of 205,986 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMJ Open
#86
of 252 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 25,589 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% 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 205,986 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 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 252 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.