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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
How to Study Chronic Diseases—Implications of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities for Research Designs
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Public Health, May 2017
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpubh.2017.00088 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Sebastian von Peter, Patrick Bieler |
| Abstract |
The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) has been received considerable attention internationally. The Convention's main arguments are conceptually analyzed. Implications for the development of research designs are elaborated upon. The Convention entails both a human rights and a sociopolitical dimension. Advancing a relational notion of disability, it enters a rather foreign terrain to medical sciences. Research designs have to be changed accordingly. Research designs in accordance with the CRPD should employ and further develop context-sensitive research strategies and interdisciplinary collaboration. Complex designs that allow for a relational analysis of personalized effects have to be established and evaluated, thereby systematically integrating qualitative methods. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 33% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 10 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 10 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 30% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 30% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 1 | 10% |
| Unknown | 2 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 4 | 40% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 30% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 10% |
| Unknown | 2 | 20% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 17 October 2018.
All research outputs
#13,859,143
of 22,968,808 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Public Health
#3,320
of 10,117 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#164,251
of 310,917 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Public Health
#43
of 85 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,968,808 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,117 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% 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 310,917 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 85 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.