↓ Skip to main content

Buddhist practices and blood pressure

Overview of attention for article published in Nursing & Health Sciences, July 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
50 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
77 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
Buddhist practices and blood pressure
Published in
Nursing & Health Sciences, July 2013
DOI 10.1111/nhs.12075
Pubmed ID
Authors

Onwilasini Stewart, Khemika Yamarat, Karl J. Neeser, Somrat Lertmaharit, Eleanor Holroyd

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to test the relationship between Buddhist religious practices and blood pressure. A cross-sectional survey of Buddhist religious practices and blood pressure was conducted with 160 Buddhist elderly in rural Uttaradit, northern Thailand. After controlling for the variables of gender, status, education, salary, underlying hypertension, exercise, salt intake, and taking antihypertensive medications, it was found that lower systolic and diastolic blood pressure is associated with the Buddhist religious practice of temple attendance. The Buddhist older people who regularly attended a temple every Buddhist Holy day (which occurs once a week) were found to have systolic and diastolic blood pressure readings lower than people who did not attend as regularly. It is recommended that nurses advocate for temple attendance in the care protocols for older Buddhist hypertensive patients both in Thailand and internationally.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 77 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 1%
Unknown 76 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 12 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 12%
Student > Master 8 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 6%
Librarian 4 5%
Other 16 21%
Unknown 23 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 22 29%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 16%
Social Sciences 6 8%
Psychology 4 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 3%
Other 6 8%
Unknown 25 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 04 July 2013.
All research outputs
#15,739,529
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Nursing & Health Sciences
#283
of 735 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#117,428
of 206,704 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nursing & Health Sciences
#3
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 735 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% 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 206,704 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.