↓ Skip to main content

Growing Up Our Way

Overview of attention for article published in Qualitative Health Research, January 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
53 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
113 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
Growing Up Our Way
Published in
Qualitative Health Research, January 2012
DOI 10.1177/1049732311432717
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sue Kruske, Suzanne Belton, Molly Wardaguga, Concepta Narjic

Abstract

In this study, we attempted to explore the experiences and beliefs of Aboriginal families as they cared for their children in the first year of life. We collected family stories concerning child rearing, development, behavior, health, and well-being between each infant's birth and first birthday. We found significant differences in parenting behaviors and child-rearing practices between Aboriginal groups and mainstream Australians. Aboriginal parents perceived their children to be autonomous individuals with responsibilities toward a large family group. The children were active agents in determining their own needs, highly prized, and included in all aspects of community life. Concurrent with poverty, neocolonialism, and medical hegemony, child-led parenting styles hamper the effectiveness of health services. Hence, until the planners of Australia's health systems better understand Aboriginal knowledge systems and incorporate them into their planning, we can continue to expect the failure of government and health services among Aboriginal communities.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 113 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 112 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 22 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 14%
Student > Master 16 14%
Researcher 12 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 7%
Other 18 16%
Unknown 21 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 24 21%
Medicine and Dentistry 17 15%
Psychology 17 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 14 12%
Arts and Humanities 4 4%
Other 16 14%
Unknown 21 19%
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 11 October 2015.
All research outputs
#13,359,365
of 22,661,413 outputs
Outputs from Qualitative Health Research
#1,126
of 1,827 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#146,604
of 244,244 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Qualitative Health Research
#6
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,661,413 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,827 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% 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 244,244 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.