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 |
Does how you do depend on how you think you'll do? A systematic review of the evidence for a relation between patients' recovery expectations and health outcomes.
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Canadian Medical Association Journal, July 2001
|
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
M V Mondloch, D C Cole, J W Frank |
| Abstract |
Most clinicians would probably agree that what patients think will happen can influence what does happen over the clinical course. Yet despite useful narrative reviews on expectancy of therapeutic gain and the mechanisms by which expectancy can affect health outcomes, we were unable to locate a systematic review of the predictive relation between patients' recovery expectations and their health outcomes. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 50 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 | 15 | 30% |
| United States | 5 | 10% |
| Australia | 4 | 8% |
| Canada | 3 | 6% |
| Sweden | 2 | 4% |
| Brazil | 2 | 4% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 2% |
| South Africa | 1 | 2% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 6% |
| Unknown | 13 | 26% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 38 | 76% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 5 | 10% |
| Scientists | 5 | 10% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 4% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 236 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | <1% |
| Australia | 2 | <1% |
| Portugal | 1 | <1% |
| Switzerland | 1 | <1% |
| Denmark | 1 | <1% |
| Iceland | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 228 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 39 | 17% |
| Researcher | 32 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 32 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 24 | 10% |
| Other | 14 | 6% |
| Other | 52 | 22% |
| Unknown | 43 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 84 | 36% |
| Psychology | 35 | 15% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 17 | 7% |
| Social Sciences | 12 | 5% |
| Sports and Recreations | 6 | 3% |
| Other | 27 | 11% |
| Unknown | 55 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 42. 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 30 November 2017.
All research outputs
#946,985
of 24,825,035 outputs
Outputs from Canadian Medical Association Journal
#1,379
of 9,290 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#513
of 39,745 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Canadian Medical Association Journal
#2
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,825,035 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,290 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 33.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% 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 39,745 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 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 95% of its contemporaries.