↓ Skip to main content

Patient’s Experience in Pediatric Primary Immunodeficiency Disorders: Computerized Classification of Questionnaires

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in immunology, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
20 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
Patient’s Experience in Pediatric Primary Immunodeficiency Disorders: Computerized Classification of Questionnaires
Published in
Frontiers in immunology, April 2017
DOI 10.3389/fimmu.2017.00384
Pubmed ID
Authors

Urs Mücke, Christian Klemann, Ulrich Baumann, Almut Meyer-Bahlburg, Xiaowei Kortum, Frank Klawonn, Werner M. Lechner, Lorenz Grigull

Abstract

Primary immunodeficiency disorders (PIDs) are a heterogeneous group of more than 200 rare diseases. Timely diagnosis is of uttermost importance. Therefore, we aimed to develop a diagnostic questionnaire with computerized pattern-recognition in order to support physicians to identify suspicious patient histories. Standardized interviews were conducted with guardians of children with PID. The questionnaire based on parental observations was developed using Colaizzis' framework for content analysis. Answers from 64 PID patients and 62 controls were analyzed by data mining methods in order to make a diagnostic prediction. Performance was evaluated by k-fold stratified cross-validation. The diagnostic support tool achieved a diagnostic sensitivity of up to 98%. The analysis of 12 interviews revealed 26 main phenomena observed by parents in the pre-diagnostic period. The questions were systematically phrased and selected resulting in a 36-item questionnaire. This was answered by 126 patients with or without PID to evaluate prediction. Item analysis revealed significant questions. Our approach proved suitable for recognizing patterns and thus differentiates between observations of PID patients and control groups. These findings provide the basis for developing a tool supporting physicians to consider a PID with a questionnaire. These data support the notion that patient's experience is a cornerstone in the diagnostic process.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 20 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 4 20%
Researcher 3 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 10%
Student > Bachelor 2 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 10%
Other 4 20%
Unknown 3 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 40%
Engineering 2 10%
Computer Science 1 5%
Mathematics 1 5%
Psychology 1 5%
Other 1 5%
Unknown 6 30%
Attention Score in Context

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 25 April 2017.
All research outputs
#22,764,772
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in immunology
#27,431
of 31,531 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#284,603
of 324,569 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in immunology
#388
of 415 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 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 31,531 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.4. 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 324,569 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 415 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.