| Title |
Conducting Discrete Choice Experiments to Inform Healthcare Decision Making
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PharmacoEconomics, September 2012
|
| DOI | 10.2165/00019053-200826080-00004 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Emily Lancsar, Jordan Louviere |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 4 | 44% |
| New Zealand | 2 | 22% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 11% |
| Unknown | 2 | 22% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 56% |
| Scientists | 3 | 33% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 11% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 709 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 7 | <1% |
| Canada | 6 | <1% |
| United States | 3 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 2 | <1% |
| Romania | 1 | <1% |
| Turkey | 1 | <1% |
| Japan | 1 | <1% |
| China | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 687 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 114 | 16% |
| Researcher | 114 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 114 | 16% |
| Lecturer | 44 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 40 | 6% |
| Other | 125 | 18% |
| Unknown | 158 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 134 | 19% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 100 | 14% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 57 | 8% |
| Social Sciences | 50 | 7% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 37 | 5% |
| Other | 137 | 19% |
| Unknown | 194 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 33. 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 February 2023.
All research outputs
#1,219,604
of 25,769,258 outputs
Outputs from PharmacoEconomics
#46
of 2,003 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#7,110
of 191,264 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PharmacoEconomics
#7
of 550 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,769,258 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,003 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 191,264 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 550 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.