| Title |
The influence of socioeconomic status on women's preferences for modern contraceptive providers in Nigeria: a multilevel choice modeling
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Patient preference and adherence, December 2013
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ppa.s51852 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Olatunde Aremu |
| Abstract |
Contraceptives are one of the most cost effective public health interventions. An understanding of the factors influencing users' preferences for contraceptives sources, in addition to their preferred methods of contraception, is an important factor in increasing contraceptive uptake. This study investigates the effect of women's contextual and individual socioeconomic positions on their preference for contraceptive sources among current users in Nigeria. |
Twitter Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nigeria | 2 | 40% |
| Italy | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 2 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 40% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 20% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 20% |
| Scientists | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 78 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 76 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 19 | 24% |
| Student > Master | 18 | 23% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 11 | 14% |
| Unknown | 10 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 19 | 24% |
| Social Sciences | 16 | 21% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 14 | 18% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 6 | 8% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 7 | 9% |
| Unknown | 14 | 18% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 11 February 2015.
All research outputs
#6,265,309
of 22,733,113 outputs
Outputs from Patient preference and adherence
#391
of 1,590 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#74,580
of 307,131 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Patient preference and adherence
#7
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,733,113 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,590 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 307,131 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 75% of its contemporaries.
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 has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.