↓ Skip to main content
Embed badge What is this page?

A commentary on evidenced-based parenting programs: redressing misconceptions of the empirical support for Triple P

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medicine, November 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (69th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
3 blogs
twitter
7 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
44 Mendeley

What is this page?

Summary Blogs Twitter Facebook Dimensions citations
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.
Title
A commentary on evidenced-based parenting programs: redressing misconceptions of the empirical support for Triple P
Published in
BMC Medicine, November 2012
DOI 10.1186/1741-7015-10-145
Pubmed ID
23173559
Authors

Matthew R Sanders, John A Pickering, James N Kirby, Karen MT Turner, Alina Morawska, Trevor Mazzucchelli, Alan Ralph, Kate Sofronoff

Abstract

A meta-analytic review of the Triple P-Positive Parenting program by Wilson et al., recently published in BMC Medicine, claimed to demonstrate that although Triple P is widely disseminated and adopted, the evidence attesting to the effectiveness of the program is not as convincing as it may appear. Although this review addresses the important issue of evaluation and reporting methods within evidence-based interventions, we contend that the Wilson et al. review contains a number of significant conceptual, methodological and interpretational inadequacies that render the key conclusions of their review problematic.

View on publisher site

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Australia 1 2%
Sweden 1 2%
Unknown 42 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 25%
Researcher 8 18%
Student > Bachelor 5 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 11%
Unspecified 3 7%
Other 12 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 16 36%
Medicine and Dentistry 12 27%
Social Sciences 9 20%
Unspecified 6 14%
Arts and Humanities 1 2%
Other 0 0%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 26. 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 16 March 2015.
All research outputs
#386,901
of 8,761,118 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medicine
#402
of 1,691 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,425
of 294,052 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medicine
#24
of 78 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 8,761,118 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,691 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 31.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% 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 294,052 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 78 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 69% of its contemporaries.

This page is provided by Altmetric.