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 |
Validity and responsiveness of EuroQol-5 dimension (EQ-5D) versus Short Form-6 dimension (SF-6D) questionnaire in chronic pain
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, July 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1477-7525-11-110 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Marko Obradovic, Arun Lal, Hiltrud Liedgens |
| Abstract |
Assessments of health-related quality of life and particularly utility values are important components of health economic analyses. Several instruments have been developed to measure utilities. However no consensus has emerged regarding the most appropriate instrument within a therapeutic area such as chronic pain. The study compared two instruments - EQ-5D and SF-6D - for their performance and validity in patients with chronic pain. |
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 288 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 3 | 1% |
| Portugal | 2 | <1% |
| Spain | 2 | <1% |
| South Africa | 1 | <1% |
| Sweden | 1 | <1% |
| Romania | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 277 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 54 | 19% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 34 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 33 | 11% |
| Researcher | 32 | 11% |
| Other | 22 | 8% |
| Other | 67 | 23% |
| Unknown | 46 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 100 | 35% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 38 | 13% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 14 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 10 | 3% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 9 | 3% |
| Other | 44 | 15% |
| Unknown | 73 | 25% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 05 July 2013.
All research outputs
#20,195,877
of 22,713,403 outputs
Outputs from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#1,970
of 2,154 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#170,676
of 194,634 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#5
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,713,403 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,154 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 194,634 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.