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 |
What is the perception of biological risk by undergraduate nursing students?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Revista Latino-Americana de Enfermagem, July 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1590/1518-8345.0722.2715 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
M Carmen Moreno-Arroyo, Montserrat Puig-Llobet, Anna Falco-Pegueroles, Maria Teresa Lluch-Canut, Irma Casas García, Juan Roldán-Merino |
| Abstract |
to analyze undergraduate nursing students' perception of biological risk and its relationship with their prior practical training. a descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted among undergraduate nursing students enrolled in clinical practice courses in the academic year 2013-2014 at the School of Nursing at the University of Barcelona. sociodemographic variables, employment, training, clinical experience and other variables related to the assessment of perceived biological risk were collected. Both a newly developed tool and the Dimensional Assessment of Risk Perception at the worker level scale (Escala de Evaluación Dimensional del Riesgo Percibido por el Trabajador, EDRP-T) were used. descriptive and univariate analysis were used to identify differences between the perception of biological risk of the EDRP-T scale items and sociodemographic variables. students without prior practical training had weaker perceptions of biological risk compared to students with prior practical training (p=0.05 and p=0.04, respectively). Weaker perceptions of biological risk were found among students with prior work experience. practical training and work experience influence the perception of biological risk among nursing students. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 2 | 29% |
| Denmark | 1 | 14% |
| India | 1 | 14% |
| Spain | 1 | 14% |
| Unknown | 2 | 29% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 7 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 51 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 51 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 12% |
| Other | 5 | 10% |
| Researcher | 3 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 8 | 16% |
| Unknown | 20 | 39% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 18 | 35% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 12% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 6% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 2% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 6% |
| Unknown | 19 | 37% |
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 23 February 2017.
All research outputs
#6,754,661
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Revista Latino-Americana de Enfermagem
#110
of 842 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#104,609
of 369,843 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Revista Latino-Americana de Enfermagem
#6
of 25 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 842 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 369,843 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 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 25 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.