↓ Skip to main content

Brief intervention for alcohol misuse in people attending sexual health clinics: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in Trials, August 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 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
Brief intervention for alcohol misuse in people attending sexual health clinics: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
Published in
Trials, August 2012
DOI 10.1186/1745-6215-13-149
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rahil Sanatinia, Barbara Barrett, Sarah Byford, Madeleine Dean, John Green, Rachel Jones, Baptiste Leurent, Anne Lingford-Hughes, Michael Sweeting, Robin Touquet, Peter Tyrer, Helen Ward, Mike J Crawford

Abstract

Over the last 30  years the number of people who drink alcohol at harmful levels has increased in many countries. There have also been large increases in rates of sexually transmitted infections. Available evidence suggests that excessive alcohol consumption and poor sexual health may be linked. The prevalence of harmful alcohol use is higher among people attending sexual health clinics than in the general population, and a third of those attending clinics state that alcohol use affects whether they have unprotected sex. Previous research has demonstrated that brief intervention for alcohol misuse in other medical settings can lead to behavioral change, but the clinical- and cost-effectiveness of this intervention on sexual behavior have not been examined.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

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 %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Unknown 53 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 19%
Student > Master 8 15%
Other 4 7%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 7%
Other 14 26%
Unknown 10 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 35%
Psychology 7 13%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 6%
Unspecified 2 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 4%
Other 8 15%
Unknown 13 24%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 26 April 2014.
All research outputs
#5,438,401
of 22,675,759 outputs
Outputs from Trials
#1,882
of 5,819 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#39,060
of 169,413 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Trials
#13
of 54 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,675,759 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,819 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% 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 169,413 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 54 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.