| Title |
Effectiveness of peer support to increase uptake of retinal examination for diabetic retinopathy: study protocol for the DURE pragmatic cluster randomized clinical trial in Kirinyaga, Kenya
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Public Health, July 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12889-018-5761-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Nyawira Mwangi, Mark Ng’ang’a, Esbon Gakuo, Stephen Gichuhi, David Macleod, Consuela Moorman, Lawrence Muthami, Peter Tum, Atieno Jalango, Kibata Githeko, Michael Gichangi, Joseph Kibachio, Covadonga Bascaran, Allen Foster |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 Kingdom | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 4 | 80% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 60% |
| Scientists | 1 | 20% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 127 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 127 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 23 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 12 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 9% |
| Researcher | 5 | 4% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 4% |
| Other | 18 | 14% |
| Unknown | 53 | 42% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 23 | 18% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 19 | 15% |
| Social Sciences | 10 | 8% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 3 | 2% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 2% |
| Other | 14 | 11% |
| Unknown | 55 | 43% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 21 July 2018.
All research outputs
#7,235,009
of 23,096,849 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#7,597
of 15,063 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#123,157
of 327,047 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#242
of 334 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,096,849 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,063 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.0. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% 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 327,047 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 334 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.