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 |
Development of a decision aid to inform patients’ and families’ renal replacement therapy selection decisions
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, December 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1472-6947-12-140 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jessica M Ameling, Priscilla Auguste, Patti L Ephraim, LaPricia Lewis-Boyer, Nicole DePasquale, Raquel C Greer, Deidra C Crews, Neil R Powe, Hamid Rabb, L Ebony Boulware |
| Abstract |
Few educational resources have been developed to inform patients' renal replacement therapy (RRT) selection decisions. Patients progressing toward end stage renal disease (ESRD) must decide among multiple treatment options with varying characteristics. Complex information about treatments must be adequately conveyed to patients with different educational backgrounds and informational needs. Decisions about treatment options also require family input, as families often participate in patients' treatment and support patients' decisions. We describe the development, design, and preliminary evaluation of an informational, evidence-based, and patient-and family-centered decision aid for patients with ESRD and varying levels of health literacy, health numeracy, and cognitive function. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 33% |
| United States | 1 | 33% |
| India | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 67% |
| Scientists | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 82 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 81 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 17 | 21% |
| Student > Master | 11 | 13% |
| Researcher | 8 | 10% |
| Other | 7 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 9% |
| Other | 15 | 18% |
| Unknown | 17 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 22 | 27% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 12 | 15% |
| Psychology | 7 | 9% |
| Computer Science | 5 | 6% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 13 | 16% |
| Unknown | 19 | 23% |
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 27 November 2017.
All research outputs
#13,372,313
of 22,687,320 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#979
of 1,980 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#156,438
of 277,168 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#30
of 45 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,687,320 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,980 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% 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 277,168 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 45 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.