↓ Skip to main content

Debate: The slippery slope of surrogate outcomes

Overview of attention for article published in Trials, October 2000
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 (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
4 tweeters
video
1 video uploader

Citations

dimensions_citation
36 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
27 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
Debate: The slippery slope of surrogate outcomes
Published in
Trials, October 2000
DOI 10.1186/cvm-1-2-076
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ralph B D'Agostino

Abstract

Surrogate outcomes are frequently used in cardiovascular disease research. A concern is that changes in surrogate markers may not reflect changes in disease outcomes. Two recent clinical trials (Heart and Estrogen/Progestin Replacement Study [HERS], and the Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial [ALLHAT]) underscore this problem since their results contradicted what was expected based on the surrogate outcomes. The current regulatory policy to allow new therapies to be introduced onto the market based solely on surrogate outcomes may need to be reviewed.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 tweeters 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 27 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 4%
Colombia 1 4%
Unknown 25 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 19%
Professor 3 11%
Student > Postgraduate 3 11%
Student > Bachelor 3 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 11%
Other 8 30%
Unknown 2 7%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 44%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 7%
Chemical Engineering 1 4%
Environmental Science 1 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 4%
Other 5 19%
Unknown 5 19%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 06 April 2020.
All research outputs
#2,287,395
of 17,379,776 outputs
Outputs from Trials
#894
of 4,585 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,074
of 134,839 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Trials
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,379,776 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,585 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% 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 134,839 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 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 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