↓ Skip to main content

Which outcome expectancies are important in determining young adults’ intentions to use condoms with casual sexual partners?: a cross-sectional study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, February 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
9 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
91 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
Which outcome expectancies are important in determining young adults’ intentions to use condoms with casual sexual partners?: a cross-sectional study
Published in
BMC Public Health, February 2013
DOI 10.1186/1471-2458-13-133
Pubmed ID
Authors

Katie V Newby, Katherine E Brown, David P French, Louise M Wallace

Abstract

The prevalence of unwanted pregnancy and sexually transmitted infection amongst young adults represents an important public health problem in the UK. Individuals' attitude towards the use of condoms has been identified as an important determinant of behavioural intentions and action. The Theory of Planned Behaviour has been widely used to explain and predict health behaviour. This posits that the degree to which an individual positively or negatively values a behaviour (termed 'direct attitude') is based upon consideration of the likelihood of a number of outcomes occurring (outcome expectancy) weighted by the perceived desirability of those outcomes (outcome evaluation). Outcome expectancy and outcome evaluation when multiplied form 'indirect attitude'. The study aimed to assess whether positive outcome expectancies of unprotected sex were more important for young adults with lower safe sex intentions, than those with safer sex intentions, and to isolate optimal outcomes for targeting through health promotion campaigns.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 91 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Nigeria 1 1%
Unknown 88 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 20 22%
Student > Master 16 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 18%
Researcher 11 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 8%
Other 10 11%
Unknown 11 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 22%
Psychology 17 19%
Social Sciences 15 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 3%
Other 11 12%
Unknown 13 14%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 26 April 2013.
All research outputs
#4,113,215
of 16,741,199 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#4,200
of 11,437 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#55,792
of 254,958 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#13
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 16,741,199 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,437 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% 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 254,958 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.