| Title |
Individual and group based parenting programmes for improving psychosocial outcomes for teenage parents and their children
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, March 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd002964.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jane Barlow, Nadja Smailagic, Cathy Bennett, Nick Huband, Hannah Jones, Esther Coren |
| Abstract |
Parenting programmes are a potentially important means of supporting teenage parents and improving outcomes for their children, and parenting support is a priority across most Western countries. This review updates the previous version published in 2001. |
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 Kingdom | 1 | 50% |
| Turkey | 1 | 50% |
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 338 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Italy | 1 | <1% |
| South Africa | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 336 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 55 | 16% |
| Researcher | 43 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 42 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 38 | 11% |
| Other | 17 | 5% |
| Other | 54 | 16% |
| Unknown | 89 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 63 | 19% |
| Psychology | 56 | 17% |
| Social Sciences | 44 | 13% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 43 | 13% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 5 | 1% |
| Other | 22 | 7% |
| Unknown | 105 | 31% |
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 07 October 2016.
All research outputs
#6,959,369
of 25,457,297 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#8,078
of 11,499 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#37,342
of 119,410 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#56
of 97 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,297 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,499 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 40.0. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% 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 119,410 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 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 97 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.