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 |
Inter-rater reliability of the Subjective Global Assessment: A systematic literature review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Nutrition, November 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.nut.2012.05.006 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jessica Steenson, Angela Vivanti, Elizabeth Isenring |
| Abstract |
Malnutrition continues to be under-recognized and undertreated in the hospitalized setting. Although no "gold standard" for the diagnosis of malnutrition exists, the Subjective Global Assessment (SGA) is a commonly used malnutrition assessment tool. The study aim was to explore the reporting of inter-rater reliability (IRR) of the SGA when used as a nutritional assessment tool in the published literature. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 48 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 12% |
| Lecturer | 4 | 8% |
| Researcher | 4 | 8% |
| Other | 12 | 24% |
| Unknown | 8 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 23 | 47% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 15 | 31% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 2% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 2% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 8 | 16% |
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 18 December 2012.
All research outputs
#15,982,793
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Nutrition
#2,070
of 3,242 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#177,764
of 285,231 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nutrition
#22
of 37 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,242 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.2. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 285,231 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.