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 |
Network analysis of global tobacco control collaboration: data from the World Conference on Tobacco or Health (WCTOH)
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Public Health, April 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12889-017-4234-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Scott J. Leischow, Janet Okamoto, Scott McIntosh, Deborah J. Ossip, Harry A. Lando |
| Abstract |
The World Conference on Tobacco or Health (WCTOH) is held every three years to foster communication and collaboration on global tobacco control. Very little is known about the nature of interactions between WCTOH attendees and their linkages to tobacco control organizations, so knowing this information could help improve tobacco control efforts. At the 2015 WCTOH, we implemented an online survey to assess barriers to global tobacco control activities, which information sources they use for tobacco control information, and with whom they interact regarding tobacco control. A total of 169 respondents completed the survey, with responses from all six World Health Organization (WHO) regions. Respondents worked in all areas of tobacco control; the most common were research (29.2%) and patient care/treatment (23.3%). The top barriers faced regarding tobacco control activities were: funding is weak (56.8%), government commitment (45.0%), tobacco industry interference (43.8%), and lack of coordination (34.3%). The network analysis identified Framework Convention Alliance (FCA) and Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco (SRNT) as the two most prominent groups that people belonged to and where they went to exchange information and best practices. Important regional and country specific groups also appear to be growing, such as the African Tobacco Control Alliance (ATCA) and the Argentinian Association of Tabacology (ASAT). Mapping and better understanding the global tobacco control network is important for informing knowledge exchange and best practices, particularly as increasing attention is being focused on global tobacco control efforts in low- and middle-income countries in particular. The present study demonstrates that even a subsample of the WCTOH shows considerable collaboration. The full WCTOH network should be mapped in order to foster greater collaboration that has the the potential to improve global tobacco control efforts. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 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 Kingdom | 4 | 33% |
| United States | 2 | 17% |
| Canada | 1 | 8% |
| Kenya | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 4 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 9 | 75% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 8% |
| Scientists | 1 | 8% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 8% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 48 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 48 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 11 | 23% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 8 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 8% |
| Researcher | 4 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 8% |
| Other | 5 | 10% |
| Unknown | 12 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 10 | 21% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 15% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 10% |
| Psychology | 3 | 6% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 7 | 15% |
| Unknown | 14 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 25 September 2021.
All research outputs
#3,940,249
of 24,059,832 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#4,349
of 15,829 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#67,125
of 313,693 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#79
of 225 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,059,832 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,829 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% 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 313,693 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 225 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 65% of its contemporaries.