↓ Skip to main content

Raising the profile of pilot and feasibility studies in relation to the development, evaluation and implementation of patient-reported outcome measures

Overview of attention for article published in Pilot and Feasibility Studies, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
40 Mendeley
Title
Raising the profile of pilot and feasibility studies in relation to the development, evaluation and implementation of patient-reported outcome measures
Published in
Pilot and Feasibility Studies, June 2017
DOI 10.1186/s40814-017-0151-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Georgina Jones

Abstract

This editorial introduces a new special series on the pilot and feasibility testing of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in the on-line open access journal Pilot and Feasibility Studies. Pilot and feasibility studies are typically implemented to address issues of uncertainty before undertaking a larger definitive study such as a randomised controlled trial or large scale survey. This editorial considers the role that such pilot and feasibility testing plays in relation to the development, evaluation and implementation of PROMs. This is often an essential element of PROM research but is typically overlooked-especially within current methodological guidance, reporting space and also debate. This editorial aims to open up a dialogue about the role of pilot and feasibility testing in relation to PROMs. It highlights some of the areas in PROMs research where these types of studies have been carried out and discusses the ways in which the PROM community may be better supported and encouraged to integrate this element of the research process into their PROM-based work.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 40 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 40 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 6 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 15%
Researcher 5 13%
Student > Bachelor 4 10%
Librarian 3 8%
Other 5 13%
Unknown 11 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 23%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 15%
Social Sciences 4 10%
Psychology 3 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Other 4 10%
Unknown 13 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 June 2017.
All research outputs
#17,289,387
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Pilot and Feasibility Studies
#822
of 1,227 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#210,826
of 330,422 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Pilot and Feasibility Studies
#27
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,227 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.5. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% 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 330,422 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.