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 |
Qualitative systematic reviews of treatment burden in stroke, heart failure and diabetes - Methodological challenges and solutions
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Research Methodology, January 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2288-13-10 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Katie Gallacher, Bhautesh Jani, Deborah Morrison, Sara Macdonald, David Blane, Patricia Erwin, Carl R May, Victor M Montori, David T Eton, Fiona Smith, David G Batty, Frances S Mair |
| Abstract |
Treatment burden can be defined as the self-care practices that patients with chronic illness must perform to respond to the requirements of their healthcare providers, as well as the impact that these practices have on patient functioning and well being. Increasing levels of treatment burden may lead to suboptimal adherence and negative outcomes. Systematic review of the qualitative literature is a useful method for exploring the patient experience of care, in this case the experience of treatment burden. There is no consensus on methods for qualitative systematic review. This paper describes the methodology used for qualitative systematic reviews of the treatment burdens identified in three different common chronic conditions, using stroke as our exemplar. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 | 3 | 50% |
| Unknown | 3 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 4 | 67% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 17% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 171 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 1% |
| Portugal | 1 | <1% |
| New Zealand | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Denmark | 1 | <1% |
| Argentina | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 164 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 36 | 21% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 22 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 21 | 12% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 10 | 6% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 5% |
| Other | 35 | 20% |
| Unknown | 38 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 50 | 29% |
| Social Sciences | 21 | 12% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 12 | 7% |
| Psychology | 11 | 6% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 5 | 3% |
| Other | 24 | 14% |
| Unknown | 48 | 28% |
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 25 March 2013.
All research outputs
#6,861,153
of 22,694,633 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#1,017
of 2,001 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#76,340
of 282,151 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#16
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,694,633 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,001 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% 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 282,151 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 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 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 50% of its contemporaries.