| Title |
Predictors for inappropriate proton pump inhibitor use: observational study in primary care
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
British Journal of General Practice, June 2022
|
| DOI | 10.3399/bjgp.2022.0178 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Lieke Maria Koggel, Marten Alexander Lantinga, Frederike Leonie Büchner, Joost Paulus Hubertus Drenth, Jacqueline Sarah Frankema, Edwin Johannes Heeregrave, Mette Heringa, Mattijs Everard Numans, Peter Derk Siersema |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 60 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 11 | 18% |
| Spain | 11 | 18% |
| United Kingdom | 6 | 10% |
| Netherlands | 3 | 5% |
| Ecuador | 3 | 5% |
| Australia | 1 | 2% |
| Mexico | 1 | 2% |
| Ireland | 1 | 2% |
| Bulgaria | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 21 | 35% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 46 | 77% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 6 | 10% |
| Scientists | 5 | 8% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 3 | 5% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 16 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unspecified | 3 | 19% |
| Lecturer > Senior Lecturer | 1 | 6% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 6% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 6% |
| Researcher | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 8 | 50% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unspecified | 3 | 19% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 19% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 6% |
| Chemistry | 1 | 6% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 7 | 44% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 65. 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 12 November 2023.
All research outputs
#670,472
of 25,698,912 outputs
Outputs from British Journal of General Practice
#278
of 4,926 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#16,742
of 446,617 outputs
Outputs of similar age from British Journal of General Practice
#8
of 76 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,698,912 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,926 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 19.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 446,617 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 76 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.