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 |
Evaluating Fidelity in Home-Visiting Programs a Qualitative Analysis of 1058 Home Visit Case Notes from 105 Families
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLOS ONE, May 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pone.0036915 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Thomas Saïas, Emilie Lerner, Tim Greacen, Elodie Simon-Vernier, Alessandra Emer, Eléonore Pintaux, Antoine Guédeney, Romain Dugravier, Susana Tereno, Bruno Falissard, Florence Tubach, Anne Revah-Levy |
| Abstract |
Implementation fidelity is a key issue in home-visiting programs as it determines a program's effectiveness in accomplishing its original goals. This paper seeks to evaluate fidelity in a 27-month program addressing maternal and child health which took place in France between 2006 and 2011. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 185 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| New Zealand | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| South Africa | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 181 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 30 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 28 | 15% |
| Researcher | 24 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 15 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 15 | 8% |
| Other | 22 | 12% |
| Unknown | 51 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 36 | 19% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 26 | 14% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 26 | 14% |
| Social Sciences | 25 | 14% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 1% |
| Other | 12 | 6% |
| Unknown | 58 | 31% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 22 May 2012.
All research outputs
#14,144,226
of 22,665,794 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#115,543
of 193,511 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#96,054
of 163,854 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#2,177
of 3,845 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,665,794 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 193,511 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.0. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% 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 163,854 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3,845 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.