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 |
Applying Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) to diagnostic tests was challenging but doable
|
---|---|
Published in |
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, April 2014
|
DOI | 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.01.006 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Gowri Gopalakrishna, Reem A. Mustafa, Clare Davenport, Rob J.P.M. Scholten, Christopher Hyde, Jan Brozek, Holger J. Schünemann, Patrick M.M. Bossuyt, Mariska M.G. Leeflang, Miranda W. Langendam |
Abstract |
The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) Working Group developed an approach to assess the quality of evidence of diagnostic tests. Its use in Cochrane diagnostic test accuracy reviews is new. We applied this approach to three Cochrane reviews with the aim of better understanding the application of the GRADE criteria to such reviews. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 184 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United Kingdom | 2 | 1% |
Portugal | 1 | <1% |
India | 1 | <1% |
Italy | 1 | <1% |
Canada | 1 | <1% |
Egypt | 1 | <1% |
Unknown | 177 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Master | 31 | 17% |
Researcher | 24 | 13% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 19 | 10% |
Other | 13 | 7% |
Student > Bachelor | 13 | 7% |
Other | 40 | 22% |
Unknown | 44 | 24% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 73 | 40% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 18 | 10% |
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 9 | 5% |
Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 9 | 5% |
Psychology | 6 | 3% |
Other | 20 | 11% |
Unknown | 49 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 18 October 2022.
All research outputs
#5,240,498
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
#1,786
of 4,783 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#48,536
of 240,228 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
#14
of 43 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,783 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% 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 240,228 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 43 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 67% of its contemporaries.