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 |
Comparing the clinical-effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of an internet-delivered Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) intervention with a waiting list control among adults with chronic pain: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMJ Open, July 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1136/bmjopen-2014-005092 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Sara Hayes, Michael Hogan, Haulie Dowd, Edel Doherty, Siobhan O'Higgins, Saoirse Nic Gabhainn, Padraig MacNeela, Andrew W Murphy, Thomas Kropmans, Ciaran O'Neill, John Newell, Brian E McGuire |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 253 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Ireland | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 251 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 41 | 16% |
| Researcher | 40 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 34 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 24 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 24 | 9% |
| Other | 39 | 15% |
| Unknown | 51 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 92 | 36% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 34 | 13% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 23 | 9% |
| Social Sciences | 6 | 2% |
| Unspecified | 5 | 2% |
| Other | 29 | 11% |
| Unknown | 64 | 25% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 06 April 2021.
All research outputs
#1,995,060
of 22,758,248 outputs
Outputs from BMJ Open
#4,062
of 22,437 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,227
of 227,688 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMJ Open
#61
of 272 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,758,248 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 22,437 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 227,688 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 272 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.