| Title |
Everyday uses of standardized test information in a geriatric setting: a qualitative study exploring occupational therapist and physiotherapist test administrators’ justifications
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Health Services Research, February 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1472-6963-14-72 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kariann Krohne, Sandra Torres, Åshild Slettebø, Astrid Bergland |
| Abstract |
Health professionals are required to collect data from standardized tests when assessing older patients' functional ability. Such data provide quantifiable documentation on health outcomes. Little is known, however, about how physiotherapists and occupational therapists who administer standardized tests use test information in their daily clinical work. This article aims to investigate how test administrators in a geriatric setting justify the everyday use of standardized test information. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Norway | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 42 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 42 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 10 | 24% |
| Researcher | 4 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 6 | 14% |
| Unknown | 13 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 10 | 24% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 10% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 5% |
| Arts and Humanities | 2 | 5% |
| Psychology | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 7 | 17% |
| Unknown | 15 | 36% |
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 04 July 2014.
All research outputs
#14,190,698
of 22,745,803 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#5,052
of 7,613 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#120,431
of 223,273 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#87
of 131 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,745,803 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,613 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% 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 223,273 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 131 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.