| Title |
Experiences of conditional and unconditional cash transfers intended for improving health outcomes and health service use: a qualitative evidence synthesis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, March 2023
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd013635.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Clara A Yoshino, Kristi Sidney-Annerstedt, Tom Wingfield, Beatrice Kirubi, Kerri Viney, Delia Boccia, Salla Atkins |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 35 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Finland | 5 | 14% |
| Ethiopia | 3 | 9% |
| Nepal | 3 | 9% |
| United Kingdom | 3 | 9% |
| United States | 2 | 6% |
| New Zealand | 1 | 3% |
| Australia | 1 | 3% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 3% |
| Kenya | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 3 | 9% |
| Unknown | 12 | 34% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 27 | 77% |
| Scientists | 5 | 14% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 6% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 3% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 134 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 134 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unspecified | 13 | 10% |
| Researcher | 10 | 7% |
| Student > Master | 10 | 7% |
| Other | 4 | 3% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 3% |
| Other | 17 | 13% |
| Unknown | 76 | 57% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 18 | 13% |
| Unspecified | 14 | 10% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 1% |
| Other | 12 | 9% |
| Unknown | 78 | 58% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 30. 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 27 February 2024.
All research outputs
#1,345,202
of 25,990,612 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#2,707
of 13,171 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#27,964
of 427,983 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#30
of 135 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,990,612 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,171 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% 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 427,983 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 135 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.