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 |
An Assessment of the Quality of CT Radiation Dose Information on the Internet
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of the American College of Radiology, October 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.jacr.2017.08.014 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Siobhán O’Neill, David Glynn, Kevin P. Murphy, Karl James, Maria Twomey, Richard Kavanagh, Owen J. O’Connor, Michael M. Maher |
| Abstract |
Our goal was to ascertain the quality of health information related to CT radiation exposure using a simulated Internet search and from incident information that may be available during day-to-day Internet usage. We entered 14 terms relating to information on CT dose into the most commonly used Internet search engine and analyzed the first 100 web page results for each. A Rich Search Site (RSS) feed search was also used to evaluate incidental information over a 12-week period in 2014. Each web page was classified as being "completely accurate," "somewhat accurate," or "inaccurate." Of 1,400 web pages, 290 were relevant and accessible. We deemed 12.8% of these pages as inaccurate and 67.2% of pages as completely accurate. The highest proportion of web pages was from media sources, which, along with discussion forums, commercial websites, and blogs, were found to have proportionally the largest amount of inaccurate information. Of 1,943 posts, 136 (7.0%) identified by the RSS were relevant, 9.6% were deemed inaccurate, and only 29.9% were deemed completely accurate. The results of our simulated query highlight the importance of public education regarding Internet usage when researching topics relating to radiation exposure associated with CT. |
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 States | 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 18 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 18 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 7 | 39% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 11% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 6% |
| Librarian | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 4 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 17% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 17% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 11% |
| Psychology | 1 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 2 | 11% |
| Unknown | 6 | 33% |
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 20 October 2018.
All research outputs
#20,663,600
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Journal of the American College of Radiology
#3,040
of 3,479 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#262,268
of 338,208 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of the American College of Radiology
#84
of 95 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,479 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% 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 338,208 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 95 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.