↓ Skip to main content

Assessing the cost effectiveness of using prognostic biomarkers with decision models: case study in prioritising patients waiting for coronary artery surgery

Overview of attention for article published in British Medical Journal, January 2010
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (56th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source

Citations

dimensions_citation
34 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
86 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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.
Title
Assessing the cost effectiveness of using prognostic biomarkers with decision models: case study in prioritising patients waiting for coronary artery surgery
Published in
British Medical Journal, January 2010
DOI 10.1136/bmj.b5606
Pubmed ID
Authors

Martin Henriksson, Stephen Palmer, Ruoling Chen, Jacqueline Damant, Natalie K Fitzpatrick, Keith Abrams, Aroon D Hingorani, Ulf Stenestrand, Magnus Janzon, Gene Feder, Bruce Keogh, Martin J Shipley, Juan-Carlos Kaski, Adam Timmis, Mark Sculpher, Harry Hemingway

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 86 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 3 3%
United States 2 2%
Brazil 1 1%
Vietnam 1 1%
Spain 1 1%
Australia 1 1%
Unknown 77 90%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 25 29%
Student > Master 12 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 10%
Professor 6 7%
Student > Bachelor 4 5%
Other 16 19%
Unknown 14 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 42 49%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 5 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 3%
Other 10 12%
Unknown 20 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 03 September 2018.
All research outputs
#4,410,224
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from British Medical Journal
#28,946
of 64,806 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#24,032
of 173,173 outputs
Outputs of similar age from British Medical Journal
#91
of 208 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,584,565 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 64,806 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 45.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% 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 173,173 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 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 208 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 56% of its contemporaries.