↓ Skip to main content

The HEART Mobile Phone Trial: The Partial Mediating Effects of Self-Efficacy on Physical Activity among Cardiac Patients

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Public Health, May 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (55th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
86 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 HEART Mobile Phone Trial: The Partial Mediating Effects of Self-Efficacy on Physical Activity among Cardiac Patients
Published in
Frontiers in Public Health, May 2014
DOI 10.3389/fpubh.2014.00056
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ralph Maddison, Leila Pfaeffli, Ralph Stewart, Andrew Kerr, Yannan Jiang, Jonathan Rawstorn, Karen Carter, Robyn Whittaker

Abstract

The ubiquitous use of mobile phones provides an ideal opportunity to deliver interventions to increase physical activity levels. Understanding potential mediators of such interventions is needed to increase their effectiveness. A recent randomized controlled trial of a mobile phone and Internet (mHealth) intervention was conducted in New Zealand to determine the effectiveness on exercise capacity and physical activity levels in addition to current cardiac rehabilitation (CR) services for people (n = 171) with ischemic heart disease. Significant intervention effect was observed for self-reported leisure-time physical activity and walking, but not peak oxygen uptake at 24 weeks. There was also significant improvement in self-efficacy.

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 86 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 1%
Unknown 85 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 23 27%
Researcher 10 12%
Student > Master 10 12%
Student > Bachelor 10 12%
Lecturer 4 5%
Other 11 13%
Unknown 18 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 19 22%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 10%
Psychology 7 8%
Computer Science 6 7%
Sports and Recreations 5 6%
Other 15 17%
Unknown 25 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 07 December 2021.
All research outputs
#6,996,768
of 22,925,760 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Public Health
#2,284
of 10,074 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#66,667
of 227,000 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Public Health
#20
of 43 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,925,760 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,074 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% 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 227,000 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 43 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its contemporaries.