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 |
Shared Sanitation versus Individual Household Latrines: A Systematic Review of Health Outcomes
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLOS ONE, April 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pone.0093300 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Marieke Heijnen, Oliver Cumming, Rachel Peletz, Gabrielle Ka-Seen Chan, Joe Brown, Kelly Baker, Thomas Clasen |
| Abstract |
More than 761 million people rely on shared sanitation facilities. These have historically been excluded from international sanitation targets, regardless of the service level, due to concerns about acceptability, hygiene and access. In connection with a proposed change in such policy, we undertook this review to identify and summarize existing evidence that compares health outcomes associated with shared sanitation versus individual household latrines. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 | 3 | 50% |
| Mexico | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 2 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 67% |
| Scientists | 2 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 334 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | <1% |
| Ghana | 1 | <1% |
| India | 1 | <1% |
| Peru | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Nigeria | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 326 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 64 | 19% |
| Researcher | 55 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 53 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 27 | 8% |
| Other | 22 | 7% |
| Other | 48 | 14% |
| Unknown | 65 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Environmental Science | 53 | 16% |
| Social Sciences | 42 | 13% |
| Engineering | 40 | 12% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 35 | 10% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 24 | 7% |
| Other | 55 | 16% |
| Unknown | 85 | 25% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 30. 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 16 December 2021.
All research outputs
#1,171,423
of 23,746,606 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#15,350
of 202,634 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#11,971
of 227,477 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#402
of 4,976 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,746,606 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 202,634 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 227,477 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 4,976 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.