↓ Skip to main content

Correction: “I Can Remember Sort of Vivid People…but to Me They Were Plasticine.” Delusions on the Intensive Care Unit: What Do Patients Think Is Going On?

Overview of attention for article published in PLoS ONE, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Readers on

mendeley
23 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.
Title
Correction: “I Can Remember Sort of Vivid People…but to Me They Were Plasticine.” Delusions on the Intensive Care Unit: What Do Patients Think Is Going On?
Published in
PLoS ONE, July 2016
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0160296
Pubmed ID
Authors

Julie L. Darbyshire, Paul R. Greig, Sarah Vollam, J. Duncan Young, Lisa Hinton

Abstract

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0153775.].

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 4%
Unknown 22 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 4 17%
Researcher 4 17%
Student > Bachelor 3 13%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 9%
Other 2 9%
Unknown 6 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 7 30%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 22%
Psychology 3 13%
Social Sciences 1 4%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 4%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 6 26%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 26 July 2016.
All research outputs
#4,080,042
of 8,133,552 outputs
Outputs from PLoS ONE
#59,907
of 112,884 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#130,098
of 257,881 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLoS ONE
#2,419
of 4,303 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 8,133,552 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 112,884 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.6. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% 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 257,881 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,303 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.