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 |
Validation of the functional assessment of cancer therapy-gastric module for the Chinese population
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, November 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1477-7525-10-145 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Hui Jun Zhou, Jimmy BY So, Wei Peng Yong, Nan Luo, Feng Zhu, Nasheen Naidoo, Shu Chuen Li, Khay Guan Yeoh |
| Abstract |
Quality of life (QoL) assessment has become an important aspect of the clinical management of gastric cancer (GC), which poses a greater health threat in Chinese populations around the world. Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Gastric Module (FACT-Ga), a questionnaire developed specifically to measure QoL of patients with GC, has never been validated in Chinese subjects. The current study was designed to examine the psychometric properties of FACT-Ga as a GC specific QoL instrument for its future use in Chinese populations. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 41 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Singapore | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 40 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 7 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 15% |
| Professor | 4 | 10% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 4 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 7 | 17% |
| Unknown | 10 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 15 | 37% |
| Psychology | 3 | 7% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 2 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 5 | 12% |
| Unknown | 13 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 22 July 2022.
All research outputs
#6,996,768
of 22,931,367 outputs
Outputs from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#818
of 2,176 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#74,047
of 277,629 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#29
of 126 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,931,367 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,176 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% 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 277,629 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 126 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 74% of its contemporaries.