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 |
Macau, World Capital for Gambling: A Longitudinal Study of a Youth Program Designed to Instill Positive Values
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Public Health, January 2013
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpubh.2013.00058 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Andrew L. Luk, W. U. Chan, Sydney X. X. Hu |
| Abstract |
This study investigated the effectiveness of a positive youth development program for Chinese Secondary 3 students in two schools, who had been followed up since their entry to Secondary 1. A mixed research method was carried out using a pre- and post-test pre-experimental design and a focus group for the participants. The subjective outcome evaluations included participants' perceptions of the program, program instructors, benefits of the program and overall satisfaction, and were positive. The longitudinal data from the objective outcome evaluation showed some notable improvements, and the overall effect of the program was also found to be positive for newcomers in the junior secondary years. The focus group interviews revealed mostly positive feedback in terms of the students' general impressions of the program, with the majority of participants perceiving benefits to themselves from the program. The findings offer positive evidence of the effectiveness of the program. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 16 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 19% |
| Researcher | 2 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 6% |
| Student > Master | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 7 | 44% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 25% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 13% |
| Psychology | 1 | 6% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 6% |
| Sports and Recreations | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 7 | 44% |
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 26 November 2013.
All research outputs
#20,210,424
of 22,731,677 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Public Health
#7,397
of 9,729 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#248,813
of 280,774 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Public Health
#50
of 67 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,731,677 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,729 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.8. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 280,774 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 67 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.