↓ Skip to main content

Caregiver burden and its determinants among family members of patients with chronic viral hepatitis in Shanghai, China: a community-based survey

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Infectious Diseases, February 2014
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 (85th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
99 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
Caregiver burden and its determinants among family members of patients with chronic viral hepatitis in Shanghai, China: a community-based survey
Published in
BMC Infectious Diseases, February 2014
DOI 10.1186/1471-2334-14-82
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hong Ren, Yan Yu, Jia-Yu Hu, Yang Shi, Yi-Han Lu, Wei Meng

Abstract

In China, caregivers of chronic viral hepatitis patients experience considerable burdens, stress and disruption of their own well-being and social activities. Measurement of the effect on caregivers is an under-researched area. The Family Burden Interview Schedule (FBIS) was primarily devised for the caregivers of schizophrenia patients, and the adverse effect of the disease was similar to the effect of chronic viral hepatitis on family caregivers. In this study, we prospectively evaluated the psychometric properties of FBIS in the field of chronic viral hepatitis and used it to determine the factors affecting the caregiver burden on the family members of chronic viral hepatitis patients in Shanghai, China.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 99 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 99 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 16 16%
Student > Master 13 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 12%
Student > Bachelor 5 5%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 5%
Other 18 18%
Unknown 30 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 12%
Psychology 8 8%
Unspecified 4 4%
Social Sciences 3 3%
Other 19 19%
Unknown 39 39%
Attention Score in Context

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 06 January 2015.
All research outputs
#3,725,060
of 22,745,803 outputs
Outputs from BMC Infectious Diseases
#1,190
of 7,663 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#46,527
of 313,178 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Infectious Diseases
#23
of 150 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,745,803 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 7,663 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 313,178 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 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 150 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.