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 |
Can the Use of Bayesian Analysis Methods Correct for Incompleteness in Electronic Health Records Diagnosis Data? Development of a Novel Method Using Simulated and Real-Life Clinical Data
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Public Health, March 2020
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpubh.2020.00054 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Elizabeth Ford, Philip Rooney, Peter Hurley, Seb Oliver, Stephen Bremner, Jackie Cassell |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 25% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 55 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 55 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 18% |
| Researcher | 6 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 11% |
| Other | 5 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 2 | 4% |
| Unknown | 23 | 42% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 11% |
| Computer Science | 5 | 9% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 7% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 5% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 12 | 22% |
| Unknown | 23 | 42% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 11 March 2020.
All research outputs
#13,093,153
of 23,197,711 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Public Health
#2,798
of 10,633 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#165,443
of 361,698 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Public Health
#40
of 127 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,197,711 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,633 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 361,698 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 127 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.