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 |
A Review of Tensions and Risks in Naturopathic Education and Training in Australia: A Need for Regulation
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Alternative & Complementary Medicine, April 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1089/acm.2011.0480 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jon Wardle, Amie Steel, Jon Adams |
| Abstract |
In line with increasing complementary medicine (CAM) use, the Australian government has committed considerable resources to the training of CAM practitioners. However, it has generally failed to complement this support with regulation or accountability measures. This is particularly true in Australia's largest CAM profession (naturopaths), which remains entirely unregulated but attracts approximately AUD$40 million each year in government funding for its education sector. This article explores the consequences of such unfettered support on professional outcomes. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Côte d'Ivoire | 1 | 50% |
| Canada | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 61 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 61 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 21 | 34% |
| Student > Master | 10 | 16% |
| Researcher | 5 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 7% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 9 | 15% |
| Unknown | 9 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 26 | 43% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 6 | 10% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 8% |
| Arts and Humanities | 3 | 5% |
| Psychology | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 7 | 11% |
| Unknown | 11 | 18% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 31 March 2019.
All research outputs
#7,206,686
of 25,377,790 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Alternative & Complementary Medicine
#1,201
of 2,527 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#46,666
of 173,047 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Alternative & Complementary Medicine
#19
of 49 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,377,790 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,527 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% 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 173,047 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 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 49 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 61% of its contemporaries.