| Title |
Preferences for Oral Anticoagulants in Atrial Fibrillation: a Best–Best Discrete Choice Experiment
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PharmacoEconomics, July 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s40273-014-0188-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Peter Ghijben, Emily Lancsar, Silva Zavarsek |
| Abstract |
Atrial fibrillation (AF) is recognised as a growing clinical and public health problem in many countries, owing to disability and death from stroke associated with the condition, high hospitalisation costs and an increasing prevalence with ageing populations. Under-treatment with oral anticoagulants has been a significant challenge of treatment, historically related to patient concerns over the safety and convenience of warfarin, which until recently was the only oral anticoagulant available. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 2 | 50% |
| New Zealand | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 25% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 131 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Slovenia | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 128 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 24 | 18% |
| Researcher | 22 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 21 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 9 | 7% |
| Other | 19 | 15% |
| Unknown | 26 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 46 | 35% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 15 | 11% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 10 | 8% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 5% |
| Engineering | 4 | 3% |
| Other | 18 | 14% |
| Unknown | 32 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 01 October 2017.
All research outputs
#5,872,994
of 22,758,963 outputs
Outputs from PharmacoEconomics
#647
of 1,816 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#54,423
of 226,891 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PharmacoEconomics
#11
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,758,963 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,816 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% 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 226,891 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 34 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 67% of its contemporaries.