| Title |
Interventions for promoting physical activity in people with cystic fibrosis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd009448.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Narelle S Cox, Jennifer A Alison, Anne E Holland, Rachel Schembri |
| Abstract |
In individuals with cystic fibrosis there are no established targets for participation in physical activity, nor have any ideal strategies to promote participation in physical activity been identified |
Twitter Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 18% |
| Colombia | 1 | 9% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 9% |
| Canada | 1 | 9% |
| Unknown | 6 | 55% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 8 | 73% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 18% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 9% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 359 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | <1% |
| Ireland | 2 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | <1% |
| Portugal | 1 | <1% |
| Italy | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 351 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 69 | 19% |
| Researcher | 38 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 35 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 33 | 9% |
| Other | 23 | 6% |
| Other | 55 | 15% |
| Unknown | 106 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 91 | 25% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 57 | 16% |
| Psychology | 19 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 13 | 4% |
| Sports and Recreations | 12 | 3% |
| Other | 46 | 13% |
| Unknown | 121 | 34% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 04 May 2016.
All research outputs
#2,364,136
of 22,736,112 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#4,979
of 12,315 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#29,018
of 307,365 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#100
of 222 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,736,112 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,315 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 30.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% 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 307,365 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 222 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 54% of its contemporaries.