↓ Skip to main content

The science of clinical practice: disease diagnosis or patient prognosis? Evidence about “what is likely to happen” should shape clinical practice

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medicine, January 2015
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 (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
122 tweeters
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
64 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
193 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
The science of clinical practice: disease diagnosis or patient prognosis? Evidence about “what is likely to happen” should shape clinical practice
Published in
BMC Medicine, January 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12916-014-0265-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Peter Croft, Douglas G Altman, Jonathan J Deeks, Kate M Dunn, Alastair D Hay, Harry Hemingway, Linda LeResche, George Peat, Pablo Perel, Steffen E Petersen, Richard D Riley, Ian Roberts, Michael Sharpe, Richard J Stevens, Danielle A Van Der Windt, Michael Von Korff, Adam Timmis

Abstract

Diagnosis is the traditional basis for decision-making in clinical practice. Evidence is often lacking about future benefits and harms of these decisions for patients diagnosed with and without disease. We propose that a model of clinical practice focused on patient prognosis and predicting the likelihood of future outcomes may be more useful.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 122 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 193 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 4 2%
United States 2 1%
Sri Lanka 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 180 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 38 20%
Student > Master 30 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 30 16%
Other 22 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 15 8%
Other 49 25%
Unknown 9 5%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 97 50%
Nursing and Health Professions 19 10%
Computer Science 12 6%
Social Sciences 8 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 3%
Other 30 16%
Unknown 21 11%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 72. 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 23 July 2019.
All research outputs
#259,671
of 14,203,325 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medicine
#228
of 2,223 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,631
of 281,662 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medicine
#2
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,203,325 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,223 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 36.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 281,662 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 97% 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 done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.