| Title |
National Institutes of Health Pathways to Prevention Workshop: Advancing the Research on Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome.
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
ACP Journal Club, June 2015
|
| DOI | 10.7326/m15-0338 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Carmen R. Green, Penney Cowan, Ronit Elk, Kathleen M. O'Neil, Angela L. Rasmussen |
| Abstract |
The National Institutes of Health (NIH) Pathways to Prevention Workshop: Advancing the Research on Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome was cosponsored by the NIH Office of Disease Prevention and the Trans-NIH Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome Research Working Group. A multidisciplinary working group developed the agenda, and an Evidence-based Practice Center prepared an evidence report through a contract with the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality to facilitate the discussion. During the 1.5-day workshop, invited experts discussed the body of evidence and attendees had the opportunity to comment during open discussions. After weighing evidence from the evidence report, expert presentations, and public comments, an unbiased, independent panel prepared a draft report that identified research gaps and future research priorities. The report was posted on the NIH Office of Disease Prevention Web site for 4 weeks for public comment. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 185 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 Kingdom | 49 | 26% |
| United States | 25 | 14% |
| Germany | 7 | 4% |
| Australia | 7 | 4% |
| Spain | 5 | 3% |
| Netherlands | 4 | 2% |
| Canada | 4 | 2% |
| Sweden | 2 | 1% |
| Ireland | 2 | 1% |
| Other | 9 | 5% |
| Unknown | 71 | 38% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 158 | 85% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 13 | 7% |
| Scientists | 11 | 6% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 3 | 2% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 82 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
| Germany | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 80 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 13 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 8 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 10% |
| Researcher | 7 | 9% |
| Other | 23 | 28% |
| Unknown | 12 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 17 | 21% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 15 | 18% |
| Psychology | 8 | 10% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 5% |
| Sports and Recreations | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 17 | 21% |
| Unknown | 17 | 21% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 169. 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 29 September 2023.
All research outputs
#243,182
of 25,769,258 outputs
Outputs from ACP Journal Club
#1,022
of 13,115 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,317
of 265,200 outputs
Outputs of similar age from ACP Journal Club
#10
of 119 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,769,258 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,115 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 63.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 265,200 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 119 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.