↓ Skip to main content

The bacteriological quality of different brands of bottled water available to consumers in Ile-Ife, south-western Nigeria

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Research Notes, November 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
28 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
54 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
The bacteriological quality of different brands of bottled water available to consumers in Ile-Ife, south-western Nigeria
Published in
BMC Research Notes, November 2014
DOI 10.1186/1756-0500-7-859
Pubmed ID
Authors

Oluwatoyin A Igbeneghu, Adebayo Lamikanra

Abstract

The upsurge in the demand for bottled water has prompted the interest of many manufacturers in the production of bottled water and very many water bottling companies are therefore involved in its production. These range from large scale multinational companies to medium scale business enterprises, institutional and government business investment companies as well as small scale entrepreneurs. There is however little information on the comparative quality of bottled water brands produced by different classes of water bottling companies in Nigeria. This study was undertaken to determine the bacteriological quality of brands of bottled water available to consumers in Ile-Ife.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 54 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 54 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 20%
Lecturer 6 11%
Researcher 5 9%
Student > Bachelor 4 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 7%
Other 5 9%
Unknown 19 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 6 11%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 7%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 6%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 3 6%
Other 14 26%
Unknown 21 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 30 November 2014.
All research outputs
#17,285,668
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from BMC Research Notes
#2,501
of 4,513 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#227,071
of 369,449 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Research Notes
#60
of 131 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,513 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.1. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% 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 369,449 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 131 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.