↓ Skip to main content

Personalised risk communication for informed decision making about taking screening tests

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, February 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source
twitter
26 tweeters
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
119 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
324 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
Personalised risk communication for informed decision making about taking screening tests
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, February 2013
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd001865.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Adrian GK Edwards, Gurudutt Naik, Harry Ahmed, Glyn J Elwyn, Timothy Pickles, Kerry Hood, Rebecca Playle

Abstract

There is a trend towards greater patient involvement in healthcare decisions. Although screening is usually perceived as good for the health of the population, there are risks associated with the tests involved. Achieving both adequate involvement of consumers and informed decision making are now seen as important goals for screening programmes. Personalised risk estimates have been shown to be effective methods of risk communication.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 26 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 324 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 5 2%
Canada 3 <1%
United States 2 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Ireland 1 <1%
Unknown 310 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 61 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 55 17%
Researcher 50 15%
Student > Bachelor 36 11%
Other 20 6%
Other 63 19%
Unknown 39 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 126 39%
Nursing and Health Professions 36 11%
Social Sciences 30 9%
Psychology 26 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 3%
Other 42 13%
Unknown 54 17%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 33. 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 13 November 2017.
All research outputs
#576,044
of 14,543,216 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#1,671
of 10,993 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,773
of 147,019 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#7
of 102 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,543,216 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,993 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 22.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 147,019 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 102 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 93% of its contemporaries.