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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
A systematic review of the quality of studies on dementia prevalence in Italy
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Health Services Research, September 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12913-016-1741-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Gianluca Bruti, Elisabetta Cavallucci, Michele Mancini, Alessandro Bitossi, Marzia Baldereschi, Sandro Sorbi |
| Abstract |
Dementia, including Alzheimer's disease (AD), is one of the most burdensome medical conditions. In order to better understand the epidemiology of dementia in Italy, we conducted a systematic search of studies published between 1980 and April 2014 investigating the prevalence of dementia and AD in Italy and then evaluated the quality of the selected studies. A systematic search was performed using PubMed/Medline and Embase to identify Italian population-based studies on the prevalence of dementia among people aged ≥60 years. The quality of the studies was scored according to Alzheimer's Disease International (ADI) criteria. Sixteen articles on the prevalence of dementia and AD in Italy were eligible and 75 % of them were published before the year 2000. Only one study was a national survey, whereas most of the studies were locally based (Northern Italy and Tuscany). Overall, the 16 studies were attributed a mean ADI quality score of 7.6 (median 7.75). Available studies on the prevalence of dementia and AD in Italy are generally old, of weak quality, and do not include all regions of Italy. The important limitations of the few eligible studies included in our analysis, mostly related to their heterogeneous design, make our systematic review difficult to interpret from an epidemiologic point of view. Full implementation of a Dementia National Plan is highly needed to better understand the epidemiology of the disease and monitor dementia patients. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 13 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 13 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 15% |
| Researcher | 1 | 8% |
| Other | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 9 | 69% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 8% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 10 | 77% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 30 September 2016.
All research outputs
#4,192,991
of 22,890,496 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#1,967
of 7,656 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#69,839
of 320,660 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#44
of 197 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,890,496 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,656 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. 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 320,660 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 197 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.