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 |
Coding algorithms for defining Charlson and Elixhauser co-morbidities in Read-coded databases
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Research Methodology, June 2019
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12874-019-0753-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
David Metcalfe, James Masters, Antonella Delmestri, Andrew Judge, Daniel Perry, Cheryl Zogg, Belinda Gabbe, Matthew Costa |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 33% |
| Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 3 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 67% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 17% |
| Scientists | 1 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 86 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 86 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 21 | 24% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 10% |
| Other | 7 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 7% |
| Other | 11 | 13% |
| Unknown | 23 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 23 | 27% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 9 | 10% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 5 | 6% |
| Psychology | 3 | 3% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 13 | 15% |
| Unknown | 30 | 35% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 14 October 2019.
All research outputs
#7,344,818
of 23,150,406 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#1,088
of 2,040 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#132,914
of 352,687 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#35
of 64 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,150,406 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,040 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. 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 352,687 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its contemporaries.
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 is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.