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 |
Assessing sarcopenic prevalence and risk factors in residential aged care: methodology and feasibility
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Cachexia, Sarcopenia and Muscle, April 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s13539-014-0144-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Timothy R. Henwood, Justin W. Keogh, Natasha Reid, Will Jordan, Hugh E. Senior |
| Abstract |
Sarcopenia is a significant geriatric syndrome with both health care expenditure and personal burden. Most recently, the European Working Group in Sarcopenia in Older Adults has established a consensus definition and assessment criteria for sarcopenia that includes a below-normal muscle mass and muscle function (either or both of below-normal muscle strength and physical performance). Using these criteria, work is needed to identify the prevalence and risk factors among the old, and those most susceptible to sarcopenia, the very old. This manuscript describes the recruitment and data collection methodology, and direct burden to participants, among a very old cohort residing in a residential aged care (RAC) setting. |
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% |
| Australia | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 132 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 131 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 22 | 17% |
| Researcher | 15 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 14 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 11 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 8 | 6% |
| Other | 26 | 20% |
| Unknown | 36 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 30 | 23% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 22 | 17% |
| Psychology | 12 | 9% |
| Sports and Recreations | 9 | 7% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 3% |
| Other | 15 | 11% |
| Unknown | 40 | 30% |
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 24 November 2014.
All research outputs
#17,604,528
of 25,806,080 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Cachexia, Sarcopenia and Muscle
#1,063
of 1,313 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#136,373
of 225,180 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Cachexia, Sarcopenia and Muscle
#11
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,806,080 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 1,313 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.1. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% 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 225,180 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.