| Title |
Home-based educational interventions for children with asthma
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd008469.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Emma J Welsh, Maryam Hasan, Patricia Li |
| Abstract |
While guidelines recommend that children with asthma should receive asthma education, it is not known if education delivered in the home is superior to usual care or the same education delivered elsewhere. The home setting allows educators to reach populations (such as the economically disadvantaged) that may experience barriers to care (such as lack of transportation) within a familiar environment. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 384 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | <1% |
| Spain | 2 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | <1% |
| Switzerland | 1 | <1% |
| India | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 375 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 66 | 17% |
| Researcher | 41 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 40 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 38 | 10% |
| Other | 22 | 6% |
| Other | 65 | 17% |
| Unknown | 112 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 125 | 33% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 43 | 11% |
| Psychology | 26 | 7% |
| Social Sciences | 26 | 7% |
| Computer Science | 6 | 2% |
| Other | 36 | 9% |
| Unknown | 122 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 01 January 2022.
All research outputs
#3,623,413
of 22,788,370 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#6,107
of 12,314 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#20,475
of 133,128 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#52
of 126 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,788,370 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,314 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 30.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% 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 133,128 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 126 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 58% of its contemporaries.