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 quality of life among people living with HIV: a systematic review of reviews
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, November 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12955-017-0778-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Vanessa Cooper, Jane Clatworthy, Richard Harding, Jennifer Whetham, Emerge Consortium |
| Abstract |
A systematic review of reviews was conducted to identify and appraise brief measures of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) that have been used in peer-reviewed research with people living with HIV. The review was conducted in two stages: 1) search of electronic databases to identify systematic reviews of tools used to measure HRQoL in adults living with HIV, published since the year 2000; 2) selection of HRQol scales from those identified in the reviews. Inclusion criteria included scales that could be self-administered in 10 min or less, covering at least 3 domains of quality of life (physical function, social/role function and mental/emotional function). For generic scales, inclusion criteria included the availability of normative data while for HIV-specific scales, patient input into the development of the scale was required. Ten reviews met the inclusion criteria. Nine generic scales met the inclusion criteria: the EuroQol five dimensions questionnaire (EQ-5D); Health Utilities Index; McGill Quality of Life questionnaire; Medical Outcomes Study (MOS) Short Form (SF)-12; SF-36; World Health Organisation Quality of Life (WHOQOL- BREF), Questions of Life Satisfaction (FLZM) and SF-20. Available psychometric data supported the EQ-5D and SF-36. Seven HIV-specific scales met the inclusion criteria: the AIDS Clinical Trials Group (ACTG)-21; HIV-QL-31; MOS-HIV; Multidimensional Quality of Life Questionnaire for Persons with HIV/AIDS (MQOL-HIV), PROQOL-HIV, Symptom Quality of Life Adherence (HIV-SQUAD) and the WHOQOL-HIV BREF. Of the HIV -specific measures, the MOS-HIV was considered to have the most well-established psychometric properties, however limitations identified in the reviews included insufficient input from people living with HIV in the development of the scale, cross-cultural relevance and continued applicability. Two relatively new measures, the WHOQOL-HIV BREF and PROQOL-HIV, were considered to have promising psychometric properties and may have more relevance to people living with HIV. The findings highlight the need for further validation of HRQoL measures in people living with HIV. The choice of one measure over another is likely to be influenced by the purpose of the quality of life assessment and the domains of HRQoL that are most relevant to the specific research or clinical question. |
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 465 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 465 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 60 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 46 | 10% |
| Researcher | 39 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 39 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 36 | 8% |
| Other | 103 | 22% |
| Unknown | 142 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 112 | 24% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 61 | 13% |
| Psychology | 27 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 19 | 4% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 17 | 4% |
| Other | 61 | 13% |
| Unknown | 168 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 19 December 2018.
All research outputs
#14,264,158
of 23,305,591 outputs
Outputs from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#1,140
of 2,197 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#174,742
of 325,811 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#24
of 64 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,305,591 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,197 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% 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 325,811 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 64 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 56% of its contemporaries.