↓ Skip to main content

Analyzing repeated data collected by mobile phones and frequent text messages. An example of Low back pain measured weekly for 18 weeks

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Research Methodology, July 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Readers on

mendeley
37 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
Analyzing repeated data collected by mobile phones and frequent text messages. An example of Low back pain measured weekly for 18 weeks
Published in
BMC Medical Research Methodology, July 2012
DOI 10.1186/1471-2288-12-105
Pubmed ID
Authors

Iben Axén, Lennart Bodin, Alice Kongsted, Niels Wedderkopp, Irene Jensen, Gunnar Bergström

Abstract

Repeated data collection is desirable when monitoring fluctuating conditions. Mobile phones can be used to gather such data from large groups of respondents by sending and receiving frequently repeated short questions and answers as text messages.The analysis of repeated data involves some challenges. Vital issues to consider are the within-subject correlation, the between measurement occasion correlation and the presence of missing values.The overall aim of this commentary is to describe different methods of analyzing repeated data. It is meant to give an overview for the clinical researcher in order for complex outcome measures to be interpreted in a clinically meaningful way.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 3%
Sweden 1 3%
Unknown 35 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 19%
Researcher 6 16%
Unspecified 6 16%
Student > Postgraduate 6 16%
Student > Master 2 5%
Other 10 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 46%
Unspecified 6 16%
Computer Science 3 8%
Social Sciences 3 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 5%
Other 6 16%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 28 July 2012.
All research outputs
#10,995,466
of 12,373,180 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#1,009
of 1,095 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#104,572
of 121,877 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#13
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,373,180 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,095 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.5. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 121,877 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.