The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Are Comic Books Appropriate Health Education Formats to Offer Adult Patients?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
The AMA Journal of Ethic, February 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1001/journalofethics.2018.20.2.ecas1-1802 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Gary Ashwal, Alex Thomas |
| Abstract |
Physicians who recommend patient education comics should consider that some patients might question the appropriateness of this format, especially in the US, where a dominant cultural view of comics is that they are juvenile and intended to be funny. In this case, Dr. S might have approached communication with Mrs. T differently, even without knowing her attitude toward comics as a format for delivering health information. Dr. S could acknowledge that though some people might not expect useful medical information in a comic format, it has unique aspects and new research on patient education comics shows that even adults are finding this medium to be effective, educational, and engaging. Offering comics to patients, however, does potentially require patient educators to invest additional time to review and assess their accuracy and relevance. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 33% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 11% |
| Unknown | 5 | 56% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 6 | 67% |
| Scientists | 2 | 22% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 11% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 65 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 65 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Lecturer | 8 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 8% |
| Other | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 13 | 20% |
| Unknown | 20 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Arts and Humanities | 12 | 18% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 11% |
| Social Sciences | 7 | 11% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 8% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 10 | 15% |
| Unknown | 21 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 48. 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 10 October 2019.
All research outputs
#936,767
of 26,495,046 outputs
Outputs from The AMA Journal of Ethic
#245
of 2,818 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,093
of 455,343 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The AMA Journal of Ethic
#9
of 37 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,495,046 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 2,818 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 22.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 455,343 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 37 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.