↓ Skip to main content

Protocol for the PACE trial: A randomised controlled trial of adaptive pacing, cognitive behaviour therapy, and graded exercise as supplements to standardised specialist medical care versus…

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Neurology, March 2007
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#7 of 1,721)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
6 blogs
policy
2 policy sources
twitter
103 tweeters
peer_reviews
1 peer review site
facebook
6 Facebook pages
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
97 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
146 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
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
Protocol for the PACE trial: A randomised controlled trial of adaptive pacing, cognitive behaviour therapy, and graded exercise as supplements to standardised specialist medical care versus standardised specialist medical care alone for patients with the chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalomyelitis or encephalopathy
Published in
BMC Neurology, March 2007
DOI 10.1186/1471-2377-7-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Peter D White, Michael C Sharpe, Trudie Chalder, Julia C DeCesare, Rebecca Walwyn

Abstract

Chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS, also called myalgic encephalomyelitis /encephalopathy or ME) is a debilitating condition with no known cause or cure. Improvement may occur with medical care and additional therapies of pacing, cognitive behavioural therapy and graded exercise therapy. The latter two therapies have been found to be efficacious in small trials, but patient organisations surveys have reported adverse effects. Although pacing has been advocated by patient organisations, it lacks empirical support. Specialist medical care is commonly provided but its efficacy when given alone is not established. This trial compares the efficacy of the additional therapies when added to specialist medical care against specialist medical care alone.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 103 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 146 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 1%
Spain 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Vietnam 1 <1%
Unknown 141 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 29 20%
Student > Master 28 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 14 10%
Student > Bachelor 13 9%
Other 29 20%
Unknown 13 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 45 31%
Medicine and Dentistry 36 25%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 5%
Sports and Recreations 7 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 4%
Other 24 16%
Unknown 21 14%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 116. 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 18 August 2019.
All research outputs
#163,262
of 15,129,195 outputs
Outputs from BMC Neurology
#7
of 1,721 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#993
of 128,843 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Neurology
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,129,195 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,721 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 128,843 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 99% 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