↓ Skip to main content

Face‐to‐face versus remote and web 2.0 interventions for promoting physical activity

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, September 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
twitter
12 tweeters
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
29 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
103 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
Face‐to‐face versus remote and web 2.0 interventions for promoting physical activity
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, September 2013
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd010393.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Richards J, Thorogood M, Hillsdon M, Foster C, Richards, Justin, Thorogood, Margaret, Hillsdon, Melvyn, Foster, Charles, Richards J; Thorogood M; Hillsdon M; Foster C

Abstract

Face-to-face interventions for promoting physical activity (PA) are continuing to be popular as remote and web 2.0 approaches rapidly emerge, but we are unsure which approach is more effective at achieving long term sustained change.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 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 103 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 103 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 1 <1%
Researcher 1 <1%
Unknown 101 98%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 1 <1%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 <1%
Unknown 101 98%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 22. 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 21 July 2015.
All research outputs
#609,191
of 12,150,781 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#1,631
of 8,196 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,360
of 160,451 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#16
of 92 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,150,781 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,196 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 19.3. 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 160,451 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 92 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.