↓ Skip to main content

Methods: Validity and utility of community health workers' estimation of kava use

Overview of attention for article published in Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health, September 2007
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source

Citations

dimensions_citation
28 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
16 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
Methods: Validity and utility of community health workers' estimation of kava use
Published in
Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health, September 2007
DOI 10.1111/j.1467-842x.2002.tb00271.x
Authors

Alan R. Clough, Ross Bailie, Chris B. Burns, Terrence Guyula, Roslyn Wunungmurra, Sylvia Rrepula Wanybarrnga

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 16 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 1 6%
Unknown 15 94%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 1 6%
Unknown 15 94%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 01 January 2007.
All research outputs
#2,046,480
of 8,111,249 outputs
Outputs from Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health
#374
of 1,105 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#30,007
of 96,838 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health
#18
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 8,111,249 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 61st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,105 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 96,838 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.