↓ Skip to main content

Trends and transient change in end‐digit preference in blood pressure recording: studies of sequential and longitudinal collected primary care data

Overview of attention for article published in International journal of clinical practice, December 2011
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
50 Mendeley
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.
Article details
Title
Trends and transient change in end‐digit preference in blood pressure recording: studies of sequential and longitudinal collected primary care data
Published in
International journal of clinical practice, December 2011
DOI 10.1111/j.1742-1241.2011.02781.x
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

End-digit preference (EDP) is a known cause of inaccurate BP recording. Distortion has been reported around pay-for-performance (P4P) indicators.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

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.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 50 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United Kingdom 6 12%
France 1 2%
Germany 1 2%
Unknown 42 84%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 12 24%
Student > Master 8 16%
Other 4 8%
Student > Bachelor 4 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 8%
Other 10 20%
Unknown 8 16%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 28%
Social Sciences 7 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 8%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 4%
Other 12 24%
Unknown 8 16%
Attention Score in Context

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 17 December 2011.
All research outputs
#31,228,668
of 34,410,798 outputs
Outputs from International journal of clinical practice
#2,952
of 3,264 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#283,411
of 305,361 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International journal of clinical practice
#42
of 42 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,410,798 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,264 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.5. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 305,361 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 42 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.