↓ Skip to main content

The influence of socioeconomic status on women’s preferences for modern contraceptive providers in Nigeria: a multilevel choice modeling

Overview of attention for article published in Patient preference and adherence, December 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (66th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Readers on

mendeley
85 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.
Article details
Title
The influence of socioeconomic status on women’s preferences for modern contraceptive providers in Nigeria: a multilevel choice modeling
Published in
Patient preference and adherence, December 2013
DOI 10.2147/ppa.s51852
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Contraceptives are one of the most cost effective public health interventions. An understanding of the factors influencing users' preferences for contraceptives sources, in addition to their preferred methods of contraception, is an important factor in increasing contraceptive uptake. This study investigates the effect of women's contextual and individual socioeconomic positions on their preference for contraceptive sources among current users in Nigeria.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
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 demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 85 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 1%
United Kingdom 1 1%
Unknown 83 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 19 22%
Student > Master 18 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 13%
Other 5 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 6%
Other 11 13%
Unknown 16 19%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 22%
Social Sciences 16 19%
Nursing and Health Professions 14 16%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 6 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 2%
Other 8 9%
Unknown 20 24%
Attention Score in Context

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 11 February 2015.
All research outputs
#12,004,713
of 34,601,305 outputs
Outputs from Patient preference and adherence
#764
of 1,966 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#121,640
of 379,173 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Patient preference and adherence
#15
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,601,305 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 64th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,966 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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 379,173 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 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.