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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Understanding critical health literacy: a concept analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Public Health, February 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2458-13-150 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Susie Sykes, Jane Wills, Gillian Rowlands, Keith Popple |
| Abstract |
Interest in and debates around health literacy have grown over the last two decades and key to the discussions has been the distinction made between basic functional health literacy, communicative/interactive health literacy and critical health literacy. Of these, critical health literacy is the least well developed and differing interpretations of its constituents and relevance exist. The aim of this study is to rigorously analyse the concept of critical health literacy in order to offer some clarity of definition upon which appropriate theory, well grounded practice and potential measurement tools can be based. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 17 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 | 7 | 41% |
| United Kingdom | 4 | 24% |
| Spain | 1 | 6% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 6% |
| Japan | 1 | 6% |
| Canada | 1 | 6% |
| Austria | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 1 | 6% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 12 | 71% |
| Scientists | 3 | 18% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 12% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 463 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 5 | 1% |
| United States | 4 | <1% |
| Portugal | 2 | <1% |
| Australia | 2 | <1% |
| Denmark | 2 | <1% |
| Sweden | 1 | <1% |
| South Africa | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 2 | <1% |
| Unknown | 442 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 65 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 64 | 14% |
| Researcher | 47 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 39 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 31 | 7% |
| Other | 109 | 24% |
| Unknown | 108 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 98 | 21% |
| Social Sciences | 78 | 17% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 72 | 16% |
| Psychology | 15 | 3% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 14 | 3% |
| Other | 71 | 15% |
| Unknown | 115 | 25% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 17 June 2023.
All research outputs
#2,784,083
of 25,837,817 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#3,424
of 17,839 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#22,085
of 208,474 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#39
of 285 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,837,817 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 17,839 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% 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 208,474 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 285 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.