↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

In-work tax credits for families and their impact on health status in adults

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, August 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (56th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
6 tweeters
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
47 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
375 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
In-work tax credits for families and their impact on health status in adults
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, August 2013
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd009963.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Frank Pega, Kristie Carter, Tony Blakely, Patricia J Lucas

Abstract

By improving two social determinants of health (poverty and unemployment) in low- and middle-income families on or at risk of welfare, in-work tax credit for families (IWTC) interventions could impact health status and outcomes in adults.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 375 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 370 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 71 19%
Researcher 50 13%
Student > Bachelor 41 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 39 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 22 6%
Other 59 16%
Unknown 93 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 99 26%
Nursing and Health Professions 45 12%
Social Sciences 40 11%
Psychology 35 9%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 9 2%
Other 40 11%
Unknown 107 29%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 24 May 2017.
All research outputs
#5,609,310
of 17,364,317 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#8,107
of 11,660 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#53,353
of 166,230 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#81
of 129 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,364,317 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,660 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 25.0. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% 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 166,230 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 56% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 129 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.