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 |
Concurrent validity of self‐report measures of eating disorders in adolescents with type 1 diabetes
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Acta Paediatrica, June 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1111/j.1651-2227.2012.02738.x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Helen d’Emden, Libby Holden, Brett McDermott, Mark Harris, Kristen Gibbons, Anne Gledhill, Andrew Cotterill |
| Abstract |
Eating disorder screening tools have not been adequately validated for use with adolescents with type 1 diabetes. This study compared the Youth Eating Disorder Examination-Questionnaire (YEDE-Q) and the Eating Disorder Inventory-3 Risk Composite (EDI-3RC) against the child Eating Disorder Examination (chEDE). These screening tools were chosen because they broadly assess eating disorder psychopathology and have subscales helpful for clinical management. |
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 55 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 2 | 4% |
| Italy | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 52 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 22% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 15% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 11% |
| Other | 4 | 7% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 11 | 20% |
| Unknown | 10 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 18 | 33% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 22% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 9% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 7% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 4 | 7% |
| Unknown | 11 | 20% |
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 23 May 2012.
All research outputs
#16,744,582
of 24,629,540 outputs
Outputs from Acta Paediatrica
#4,125
of 5,649 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#110,984
of 170,660 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Acta Paediatrica
#29
of 41 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,629,540 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,649 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.1. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% 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 170,660 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 41 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.