| Title |
Can Internet Information on Vertebroplasty be a Reliable Means of Patient Self-education?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research, December 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11999-013-3425-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
T. Barrett Sullivan, Joshua T. Anderson, Uri M. Ahn, Nicholas U. Ahn |
| Abstract |
Studies of the quality and accuracy of health and medical information available on the Internet have shown that many sources provide inadequate information. However, to our knowledge, there are no published studies analyzing the quality of information available online regarding vertebroplasty. Because this has been a high-volume procedure with highly debated efficacy, it is critical that patients receive complete, accurate, and well-balanced information before deciding a treatment course. Additionally, few studies have evaluated the merit of academic site authorship or site certification on information quality, but some studies have used measurements of quality that are based primarily on subjective criteria or information accuracy rather than information completeness. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 3 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 108 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Iran, Islamic Republic of | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 106 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 17 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 16 | 15% |
| Other | 10 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 8 | 7% |
| Other | 26 | 24% |
| Unknown | 22 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 28 | 26% |
| Social Sciences | 13 | 12% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 6 | 6% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 6% |
| Computer Science | 6 | 6% |
| Other | 20 | 19% |
| Unknown | 29 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 52. 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 25 November 2014.
All research outputs
#803,582
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research
#79
of 7,298 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#8,309
of 320,394 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research
#1
of 111 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 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 7,298 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 320,394 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 111 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.