↓ Skip to main content

Quality of internet-based decision aids for shoulder arthritis: what are patients reading?

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
20 Mendeley
Title
Quality of internet-based decision aids for shoulder arthritis: what are patients reading?
Published in
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, April 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12891-018-2018-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jeremy S. Somerson, Aaron J. Bois, Jeffrey Jeng, Kamal I. Bohsali, John W. Hinchey, Michael A. Wirth

Abstract

The objective of this study was to assess the source, quality, accuracy, and completeness of Internet-based information for shoulder arthritis. A web search was performed using three common Internet search engines and the top 50 sites from each search were analyzed. Information sources were categorized into academic, commercial, non-profit, and physician sites. Information quality was measured using the Health On the Net (HON) Foundation principles, content accuracy by counting factual errors and completeness using a custom template. After removal of duplicates and sites that did not provide an overview of shoulder arthritis, 49 websites remained for analysis. The majority of sites were from commercial (n = 16, 33%) and physician (n = 16, 33%) sources. An additional 12 sites (24%) were from an academic institution and five sites (10%) were from a non-profit organization. Commercial sites had the highest number of errors, with a five-fold likelihood of containing an error compared to an academic site. Non-profit sites had the highest HON scores, with an average of 9.6 points on a 16-point scale. The completeness score was highest for academic sites, with an average score of 19.2 ± 6.7 (maximum score of 49 points); other information sources had lower scores (commercial, 15.2 ± 2.9; non-profit, 18.7 ± 6.8; physician, 16.6 ± 6.3). Patient information on the Internet regarding shoulder arthritis is of mixed accuracy, quality, and completeness. Surgeons should actively direct patients to higher-quality Internet sources.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 20 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 3 15%
Other 2 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 10%
Student > Postgraduate 2 10%
Student > Master 2 10%
Other 1 5%
Unknown 8 40%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 25%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 10%
Psychology 1 5%
Social Sciences 1 5%
Neuroscience 1 5%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 10 50%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 02 February 2019.
All research outputs
#14,102,908
of 23,881,329 outputs
Outputs from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#2,003
of 4,185 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#173,232
of 331,266 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#23
of 59 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,881,329 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,185 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% 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 331,266 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 59 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 62% of its contemporaries.