| Title |
Social network interventions for health behaviours and outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLOS Medicine, September 2019
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pmed.1002890 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ruth F. Hunter, Kayla de la Haye, Jennifer M. Murray, Jennifer Badham, Thomas W. Valente, Mike Clarke, Frank Kee |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 46 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 | 11 | 24% |
| United Kingdom | 10 | 22% |
| Canada | 2 | 4% |
| Switzerland | 2 | 4% |
| Ireland | 1 | 2% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 2% |
| Spain | 1 | 2% |
| Japan | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 17 | 37% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 22 | 48% |
| Scientists | 19 | 41% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 5 | 11% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 369 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 369 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 43 | 12% |
| Researcher | 36 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 36 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 33 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 14 | 4% |
| Other | 52 | 14% |
| Unknown | 155 | 42% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 42 | 11% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 35 | 9% |
| Psychology | 32 | 9% |
| Social Sciences | 31 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 2% |
| Other | 51 | 14% |
| Unknown | 171 | 46% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 58. 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 27 January 2023.
All research outputs
#751,566
of 25,750,437 outputs
Outputs from PLOS Medicine
#1,155
of 5,237 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,596
of 351,450 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS Medicine
#19
of 84 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,750,437 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,237 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 76.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 351,450 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 84 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.