| Title |
Use, perceptions, and acceptability of a ready-to-use supplementary food among adult HIV patients initiating antiretroviral treatment: a qualitative study in Ethiopia
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Patient preference and adherence, June 2013
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ppa.s44413 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Mette Frahm Olsen, Markos Tesfaye, Pernille Kaestel, Henrik Friis, Lotte Holm |
| Abstract |
Ready-to-use supplementary foods (RUSF) are used increasingly in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) programs, but little is known about how it is used and viewed by patients. We used qualitative methods to explore the use, perceptions, and acceptability of RUSF among adult HIV patients in Jimma, Ethiopia. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 25% |
| United States | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Malaysia | 1 | 2% |
| United States | 1 | 2% |
| Brazil | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 56 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 16 | 27% |
| Researcher | 8 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 13 | 22% |
| Unknown | 9 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 15 | 25% |
| Social Sciences | 8 | 14% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 12% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 6 | 10% |
| Psychology | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 7 | 12% |
| Unknown | 13 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 16 July 2013.
All research outputs
#15,169,543
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Patient preference and adherence
#809
of 1,757 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#112,145
of 206,480 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Patient preference and adherence
#16
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,757 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% 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 206,480 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.