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 |
Measuring the impact of migraine for evaluating outcomes of preventive treatments for migraine headaches
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, October 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12955-016-0542-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Sally Mannix, Anne Skalicky, Dawn C. Buse, Pooja Desai, Sandhya Sapra, Brian Ortmeier, Katherine Widnell, Asha Hareendran |
| Abstract |
Migraine is characterized by headache with symptoms such as intense pain, nausea, vomiting, photophobia, and phonophobia that significantly impact individuals' lives. The objective of this study was to develop a strategy to measure outcomes from the patients' perspectives for use in evaluating preventive treatments for migraine. This study used a multi-stage process. The first stage included concept identification research through literature review, patient-reported outcome (PRO) instrument content review, and clinician interviews, and resulted in a list of concepts relevant to understand the migraine experience. These results informed the design of the subsequent concept elicitation stage that involved qualitative interviews of adults with migraine to understand their experiences. Information from these two stages was used to develop a conceptual disease model (CDM) of the migraine experience. This CDM was used to identify concepts of interest (COI) to evaluate patient-relevant outcomes for assessing treatment benefit of migraine prophylactics. In the final stage, existing PRO instruments were reviewed to assess coverage of concepts related to the selected COI. Nine articles from 563 screened abstracts underwent full review to identify migraine-relevant concepts. This concept identification and subsequent concept elicitation interviews (N = 32; 21 episodic migraine; 11 chronic migraine) indicated that people with migraine experience difficulties during and between migraine attacks with considerable day-to-day variability in the impact on movement, ability to perform every day and social activities, and emotion. The CDM organized concepts as proximal to and more distal from disease-defining migraine symptoms, and was used to identify impact on physical function as the key COI. The item level review of PRO instruments revealed that none of the existing PRO instruments were suitable to collect data on impact of migraine on physical functioning, to evaluate treatment benefit. The impact of migraine includes impairments in functioning during and between migraine attacks that vary considerably on a daily basis. There is a need for novel PRO instruments that reflect patients' migraine experience to assess treatment benefit of migraine prophylactics. These instruments must evaluate the concepts identified and be able to capture the variability of patients' experience. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 | 1 | 25% |
| United States | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 91 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 90 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 13 | 14% |
| Researcher | 13 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 12 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 11% |
| Other | 8 | 9% |
| Other | 20 | 22% |
| Unknown | 15 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 17 | 19% |
| Social Sciences | 8 | 9% |
| Neuroscience | 7 | 8% |
| Psychology | 7 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 6 | 7% |
| Other | 25 | 27% |
| Unknown | 21 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 23 August 2023.
All research outputs
#2,395,785
of 24,312,464 outputs
Outputs from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#151
of 2,251 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#41,159
of 324,788 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#1
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,312,464 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,251 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 324,788 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 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 99% of its contemporaries.