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 |
Implementing disability evaluation and welfare services based on the framework of the international classification of functioning, disability and health: experiences in Taiwan
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Health Services Research, October 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1472-6963-13-416 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Wen-Ta Chiu, Chia-Feng Yen, Sue-Wen Teng, Hua-Fang Liao, Kwang-Hwa Chang, Wen-Chou Chi, Yen-Ho Wang, Tsan-Hon Liou |
| Abstract |
Before 2007, the disability evaluation was based on the medical model in Taiwan. According to the People with Disabilities Rights Protection Act, from 2012 the assessment of a person's eligibility for disability benefits has to be determined based on the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF) framework nationwide. The purposes of this study were to: 1) design the evaluation tools for disability eligibility system based on the ICF/ICF-Children and Youth; 2) compare the differences of grades of disability between the old and new evaluation systems; 3) analyse the outcome of the new disability evaluation system. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 123 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 2% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 120 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 19 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 18 | 15% |
| Researcher | 15 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 14 | 11% |
| Lecturer | 6 | 5% |
| Other | 20 | 16% |
| Unknown | 31 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 22 | 18% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 18 | 15% |
| Social Sciences | 16 | 13% |
| Psychology | 8 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 6 | 5% |
| Other | 17 | 14% |
| Unknown | 36 | 29% |
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 16 October 2013.
All research outputs
#15,283,138
of 22,727,570 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#5,541
of 7,605 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#129,618
of 210,688 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#96
of 127 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,727,570 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,605 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% 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 210,688 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 127 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.