| Title |
Pilot testing and evaluation of a toolkit for menstrual hygiene management in emergencies in three refugee camps in Northwest Tanzania
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of International Humanitarian Action, May 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s41018-018-0034-7 |
| Authors |
Marni Sommer, Margaret L. Schmitt, Tom Ogello, Penninah Mathenge, Magdalena Mark, David Clatworthy, Samanatha Khandakji, Ruwan Ratnayake |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 41 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 | 14 | 34% |
| United Kingdom | 3 | 7% |
| Australia | 3 | 7% |
| Uganda | 3 | 7% |
| Kenya | 1 | 2% |
| Ireland | 1 | 2% |
| Italy | 1 | 2% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 2% |
| Congo, The Democratic Republic of the | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 13 | 32% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 33 | 80% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 3 | 7% |
| Scientists | 3 | 7% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 5% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 94 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 94 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 24 | 26% |
| Student > Bachelor | 11 | 12% |
| Researcher | 9 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 5% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 7 | 7% |
| Unknown | 36 | 38% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 17 | 18% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 15 | 16% |
| Environmental Science | 5 | 5% |
| Engineering | 5 | 5% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 5% |
| Other | 7 | 7% |
| Unknown | 40 | 43% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 51. 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 28 June 2018.
All research outputs
#847,587
of 25,711,998 outputs
Outputs from Journal of International Humanitarian Action
#14
of 141 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#18,490
of 339,901 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of International Humanitarian Action
#2
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,711,998 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 141 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 339,901 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.