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 |
Is chronic pelvic pain a comfortable diagnosis for primary care practitioners: a qualitative study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Primary Care, January 2010
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2296-11-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Linda McGowan, Diane Escott, Karen Luker, Francis Creed, Carolyn Chew-Graham |
| Abstract |
Chronic pelvic pain (CPP) has a prevalence similar to asthma and chronic back pain, but little is known about how general practitioners (GPs) and practice nurses manage women with this problem. A clearer understanding of current management is necessary to develop appropriate strategies, in keeping with current health care policy, for the supported self-management of patients with long term conditions. The aim of this study was to explore GPs' and practice nurses' understanding and perspectives on the management of chronic pelvic pain. |
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 States | 1 | 17% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 4 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 83% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 111 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 2% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 108 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 20 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 16 | 14% |
| Researcher | 11 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 9 | 8% |
| Other | 23 | 21% |
| Unknown | 23 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 28 | 25% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 17 | 15% |
| Social Sciences | 14 | 13% |
| Psychology | 14 | 13% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 9 | 8% |
| Unknown | 26 | 23% |
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 09 March 2013.
All research outputs
#7,714,565
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from BMC Primary Care
#987
of 2,359 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#47,653
of 172,170 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Primary Care
#6
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 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 2,359 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% 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 172,170 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 12 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.