↓ Skip to main content

Do members of the public think they should use lateral flow tests (LFT) or polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests when they have COVID-19-like symptoms? The COVID-19 Rapid Survey of Adherence to…

Overview of attention for article published in Public Health (Elsevier), September 2021
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)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
90 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
27 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.
Title
Do members of the public think they should use lateral flow tests (LFT) or polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests when they have COVID-19-like symptoms? The COVID-19 Rapid Survey of Adherence to Interventions and Responses study
Published in
Public Health (Elsevier), September 2021
DOI 10.1016/j.puhe.2021.07.023
Pubmed ID
Authors

L.E. Smith, H.W.W. Potts, R. Amlȏt, N.T. Fear, S. Michie, G.J. Rubin

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 90 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 27 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 27 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 6 22%
Researcher 4 15%
Lecturer 3 11%
Unspecified 1 4%
Librarian 1 4%
Other 2 7%
Unknown 10 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 30%
Social Sciences 2 7%
Computer Science 1 4%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 4%
Other 4 15%
Unknown 10 37%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 52. 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 May 2022.
All research outputs
#643,959
of 21,817,553 outputs
Outputs from Public Health (Elsevier)
#92
of 2,991 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,931
of 341,692 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Public Health (Elsevier)
#4
of 131 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,817,553 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 2,991 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 341,692 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 131 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.