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 |
Patients’ experiences of self-monitoring blood pressure and self-titration of medication: the TASMINH2 trial qualitative study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
British Journal of General Practice, February 2012
|
| DOI | 10.3399/bjgp12x625201 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Miren I Jones, Sheila M Greenfield, Emma P Bray, Sabrina Baral-Grant, F D Richard Hobbs, Roger Holder, Paul Little, Jonathan Mant, Satnam K Virdee, Bryan Williams, Richard J McManus |
| Abstract |
Self-management of hypertension, comprising self-monitoring of blood pressure with self-titration of medication, improves blood pressure control, but little is known regarding the views of patients undertaking it. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 160 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 1% |
| Switzerland | 1 | <1% |
| India | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Japan | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 153 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 31 | 19% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 24 | 15% |
| Researcher | 19 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 13 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 11 | 7% |
| Other | 26 | 16% |
| Unknown | 36 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 56 | 35% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 26 | 16% |
| Psychology | 10 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 5 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 3% |
| Other | 13 | 8% |
| Unknown | 46 | 29% |
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 07 December 2021.
All research outputs
#6,457,954
of 22,925,760 outputs
Outputs from British Journal of General Practice
#2,149
of 4,292 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#58,801
of 248,174 outputs
Outputs of similar age from British Journal of General Practice
#18
of 53 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,925,760 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,292 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.5. 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 248,174 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 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 53 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 64% of its contemporaries.