↓ Skip to main content

Patient-reported outcome measures in patients with peripheral arterial disease: a systematic review of psychometric properties

Overview of attention for article published in Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (66th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
29 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
58 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-reported outcome measures in patients with peripheral arterial disease: a systematic review of psychometric properties
Published in
Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, November 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12955-016-0563-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Edith Poku, Rosie Duncan, Anju Keetharuth, Munira Essat, Patrick Phillips, Helen Buckley Woods, Simon Palfreyman, Georgina Jones, Eva Kaltenthaler, Jonathan Michaels

Abstract

Peripheral arterial disease (PAD) is generally associated with considerable morbidity and reduced quality of life. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) provide important information about the burden of disease and impact of treatment in affected patients. The objective of the review was to identify and appraise studies reporting the psychometric evaluation of PROMs administered to a specified population of patients with PAD with a view to recommending suitable PROMs. A systematic review of peer-reviewed English language articles was undertaken to identify primary studies reporting psychometric properties of PROMs in English-speaking patients with various stages of PAD. Comprehensive searches were completed up until January 2015. Study selection, data extraction and quality assessment were undertaken independently by at least two researchers. Findings were presented as tabular and narrative summaries based on accepted guidance. Psychometric evaluation of 6 generic and 7 condition-specific PROMs reported in 14 studies contributed data to the review. The frequently reported measure was the SF-36 (n = 11 studies); others included the Walking Impairment Questionnaire (n = 8 studies), EQ-5D (n = 5 studies) and the Vascular Quality of Life Questionnaire (n = 3 studies). Studies included a diverse PAD population and varied in methodology, including approach to validation of PROMs. Various PROMs have been validated in patients with PAD but no study provided evidence of a full psychometric evaluation in the patient population. Careful selection is required to identify reliable and valid PROMs to use in clinical and research settings.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users 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 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 58 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 16%
Researcher 9 16%
Student > Master 7 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 9%
Student > Bachelor 5 9%
Other 13 22%
Unknown 10 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 29 50%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 12%
Psychology 2 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Sports and Recreations 2 3%
Other 4 7%
Unknown 12 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 10 December 2016.
All research outputs
#7,435,289
of 22,903,988 outputs
Outputs from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#828
of 2,160 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#136,206
of 415,133 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#7
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,903,988 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,160 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% 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 415,133 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 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 33 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.