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 |
Where is the evidence for emergency planning: a scoping review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Public Health, July 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2458-12-542 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kirsty Challen, Andrew CK Lee, Andrew Booth, Paolo Gardois, Helen Buckley Woods, Steve W Goodacre |
| Abstract |
Recent terrorist attacks and natural disasters have led to an increased awareness of the importance of emergency planning. However, the extent to which emergency planners can access or use evidence remains unclear. The aim of this study was to identify, analyse and assess the location, source and quality of emergency planning publications in the academic and UK grey literature. |
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 Kingdom | 1 | 17% |
| Canada | 1 | 17% |
| United States | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 3 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 67% |
| Scientists | 1 | 17% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 245 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 4 | 2% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 240 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 38 | 16% |
| Other | 35 | 14% |
| Researcher | 29 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 21 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 16 | 7% |
| Other | 32 | 13% |
| Unknown | 74 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 44 | 18% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 25 | 10% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 16 | 7% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 15 | 6% |
| Psychology | 11 | 4% |
| Other | 52 | 21% |
| Unknown | 82 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. 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 10 July 2021.
All research outputs
#1,568,154
of 22,671,366 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#1,713
of 14,752 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,879
of 164,297 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#23
of 333 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,671,366 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,752 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 164,297 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 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 333 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 93% of its contemporaries.