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 |
Understanding and using patient experiences as evidence in healthcare priority setting
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation, September 2019
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12962-019-0188-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Leah Rand, Michael Dunn, Ingrid Slade, Sheela Upadhyaya, Mark Sheehan |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 51 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 | 13 | 25% |
| Australia | 7 | 14% |
| Spain | 4 | 8% |
| Ireland | 3 | 6% |
| Canada | 2 | 4% |
| United States | 2 | 4% |
| Singapore | 1 | 2% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 18 | 35% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 31 | 61% |
| Scientists | 13 | 25% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 7 | 14% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 137 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 137 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 20 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 15 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 14 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 9 | 7% |
| Other | 8 | 6% |
| Other | 16 | 12% |
| Unknown | 55 | 40% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 26 | 19% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 21 | 15% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 3% |
| Psychology | 4 | 3% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 3 | 2% |
| Other | 19 | 14% |
| Unknown | 60 | 44% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 29. 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 24 November 2022.
All research outputs
#1,363,177
of 25,632,496 outputs
Outputs from Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation
#18
of 542 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#28,706
of 356,750 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation
#1
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,632,496 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 542 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 356,750 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 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them