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 |
Delivering the diabetes education and self management for ongoing and newly diagnosed (DESMOND) programme for people with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes: cost effectiveness analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
British Medical Journal, August 2010
|
| DOI | 10.1136/bmj.c4093 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
M Gillett, H M Dallosso, S Dixon, A Brennan, M E Carey, M J Campbell, S Heller, K Khunti, T C Skinner, M J Davies |
| Abstract |
To assess the long term clinical and cost effectiveness of the diabetes education and self management for ongoing and newly diagnosed (DESMOND) intervention compared with usual care in people with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 Kingdom | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 4 | 80% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 60% |
| Scientists | 2 | 40% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 420 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 7 | 2% |
| Denmark | 3 | <1% |
| Italy | 2 | <1% |
| Ecuador | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Portugal | 1 | <1% |
| South Africa | 1 | <1% |
| Turkey | 1 | <1% |
| Belgium | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 401 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 84 | 20% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 55 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 48 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 44 | 10% |
| Researcher | 41 | 10% |
| Other | 77 | 18% |
| Unknown | 71 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 164 | 39% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 53 | 13% |
| Social Sciences | 29 | 7% |
| Psychology | 17 | 4% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 14 | 3% |
| Other | 62 | 15% |
| Unknown | 81 | 19% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. 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 19 October 2018.
All research outputs
#2,140,595
of 25,593,129 outputs
Outputs from British Medical Journal
#19,177
of 64,828 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#7,640
of 105,138 outputs
Outputs of similar age from British Medical Journal
#53
of 204 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,593,129 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 64,828 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 70% 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 105,138 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 204 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 74% of its contemporaries.