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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Clinical practice guidelines for dementia in Australia
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Medical Journal of Australia, March 2016
|
| DOI | 10.5694/mja15.01339 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kate Laver, Robert G Cumming, Suzanne M Dyer, Meera R Agar, Kaarin J Anstey, Elizabeth Beattie, Henry Brodaty, Tony Broe, Lindy Clemson, Maria Crotty, Margaret Dietz, Brian M Draper, Leon Flicker, Margeret Friel, Louise Mary Heuzenroeder, Susan Koch, Susan Kurrle, Rhonda Nay, C Dimity Pond, Jane Thompson, Yvonne Santalucia, Craig Whitehead, Mark W Yates |
| Abstract |
About 9% of Australians aged 65 years and over have a diagnosis of dementia. Clinical practice guidelines aim to enhance research translation by synthesising recent evidence for health and aged care professionals. New clinical practice guidelines and principles of care for people with dementia detail the optimal diagnosis and management in community, residential and hospital settings. The guidelines have been approved by the National Health and Medical Research Council. The guidelines emphasise timely diagnosis; living well with dementia and delaying functional decline; managing symptoms through training staff in how to provide person-centred care and using non-pharmacological approaches in the first instance; and training and supporting families and carers to provide care. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 209 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 208 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 33 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 26 | 12% |
| Researcher | 25 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 20 | 10% |
| Other | 13 | 6% |
| Other | 50 | 24% |
| Unknown | 42 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 55 | 26% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 45 | 22% |
| Psychology | 23 | 11% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 9 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 9 | 4% |
| Other | 17 | 8% |
| Unknown | 51 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 32. 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 25 March 2016.
All research outputs
#1,226,211
of 25,461,852 outputs
Outputs from Medical Journal of Australia
#732
of 5,738 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#20,714
of 313,834 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Medical Journal of Australia
#22
of 69 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,461,852 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 5,738 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 313,834 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 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 69 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 68% of its contemporaries.