↓ Skip to main content

Methods used in the selection of instruments for outcomes included in core outcome sets have improved since the publication of the COSMIN/COMET guideline

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, September 2020
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
33 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
28 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
41 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
Methods used in the selection of instruments for outcomes included in core outcome sets have improved since the publication of the COSMIN/COMET guideline
Published in
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, September 2020
DOI 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.05.021
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sarah L. Gorst, Cecilia A.C. Prinsen, Maximilian Salcher-Konrad, Karen Matvienko-Sikar, Paula R. Williamson, Caroline B. Terwee

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 33 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 41 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 41 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 9 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 10%
Other 3 7%
Student > Bachelor 3 7%
Student > Postgraduate 3 7%
Other 8 20%
Unknown 11 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 39%
Psychology 5 12%
Computer Science 2 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 5%
Neuroscience 2 5%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 12 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. 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 July 2020.
All research outputs
#2,141,870
of 25,189,292 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
#783
of 4,244 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#54,888
of 406,742 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
#22
of 95 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,189,292 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,244 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 406,742 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 95 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.