↓ Skip to main content

Validity of parent's self-reported responses to home safety questions

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Injury Control and Safety Promotion, February 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#50 of 357)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
14 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
Validity of parent's self-reported responses to home safety questions
Published in
International Journal of Injury Control and Safety Promotion, February 2015
DOI 10.1080/17457300.2014.992348
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jodie M. Osborne, Rania Shibl, Cate M. Cameron, Denise Kendrick, Ronan A. Lyons, Anneliese B. Spinks, Neil Sipe, Roderick J. McClure

Abstract

The aim of the study was to describe the validity of parent's self-reported responses to questions on home safety practices for children of 2-4 years. A cross-sectional validation study compared parent's self-administered responses to items in the Home Injury Prevention Survey with home observations undertaken by trained researchers. The relationship between the questionnaire and observation results was assessed using percentage agreement, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and intraclass correlation coefficients. Percentage agreements ranged from 44% to 100% with 40 of the total 45 items scoring higher than 70%. Sensitivities ranged from 0% to 100%, with 27 items scoring at least 70%. Specificities also ranged from 0% to 100%, with 33 items scoring at least 70%. As such, the study identified a series of self-administered home safety questions that have sensitivities, specificities and predictive values sufficiently high to allow the information to be useful in research and injury prevention practice.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 14 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 14 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 4 29%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 14%
Other 1 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 7%
Student > Bachelor 1 7%
Other 2 14%
Unknown 3 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 4 29%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 21%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 7%
Psychology 1 7%
Mathematics 1 7%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 4 29%
Attention Score in Context

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 14 June 2015.
All research outputs
#4,299,284
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Injury Control and Safety Promotion
#50
of 357 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#49,721
of 270,174 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Injury Control and Safety Promotion
#1
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 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 357 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% 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 270,174 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 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them