The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 66 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
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 |
Health State Utility Values for Ileostomies and Colostomies: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery, January 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11605-018-3671-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Fahima Dossa, Jonathan Josse, Sergio A Acuna, Nancy N Baxter |
| Abstract |
Ileostomies and colostomies may affect the quality of life of patients after colorectal surgery; however, the impact has been difficult to quantify using questionnaire-based measures. Utilities reflect patient preferences for health states and provide an alternate method of quality of life assessment. We aimed to systematically review the literature on utilities for ileostomy and colostomy health states. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and EBM Reviews (to August 16, 2017) to identify studies reporting utilities for colostomies or ileostomies using direct or indirect, preference-based elicitation tools. We categorized utilities based on elicitation group (patients with stoma, patients without stoma, healthcare providers, general population) and tool. We pooled utilities using random effects models to determine mean utilities for each elicitation group and tool. We identified ten studies reporting colostomy utilities and three studies reporting ileostomy utilities. Utilities were most commonly obtained using direct elicitation measures administered to individuals with an understanding of the health state. Patients with stomas and providers gave high utility ratings for the colostomy state (range 0.88-0.92 and 0.86-0.92, respectively, using direct elicitation tools). Ileostomy utilities obtained from patients following surgery and from providers also demonstrated high values placed on the ileostomy health state (range 0.88-1.0). Following stoma surgery, values placed on quality of life are similar to those obtained from patients with conditions such as asthma and allergies or individuals of similar age without chronic conditions. This confirms the findings of questionnaire-based studies, which report minimal long-term decrements to overall quality of life among stomates. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 11 | 17% |
| United Kingdom | 8 | 12% |
| Canada | 6 | 9% |
| Spain | 2 | 3% |
| Australia | 2 | 3% |
| Poland | 1 | 2% |
| Chile | 1 | 2% |
| Germany | 1 | 2% |
| Mauritius | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 33 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 28 | 42% |
| Members of the public | 25 | 38% |
| Scientists | 11 | 17% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 3% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 37 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 5 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 14% |
| Researcher | 4 | 11% |
| Lecturer | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 9 | 24% |
| Unknown | 8 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 14 | 38% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 9 | 24% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 3% |
| Psychology | 1 | 3% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 2 | 5% |
| Unknown | 9 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 39. 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 January 2019.
All research outputs
#1,114,052
of 26,313,853 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery
#22
of 2,593 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#25,270
of 455,978 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery
#1
of 40 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,313,853 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,593 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 455,978 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 40 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 97% of its contemporaries.