↓ Skip to main content

Cost-effectiveness of compression technologies for evidence-informed leg ulcer care: results from the Canadian Bandaging Trial

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, October 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
109 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
Cost-effectiveness of compression technologies for evidence-informed leg ulcer care: results from the Canadian Bandaging Trial
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, October 2012
DOI 10.1186/1472-6963-12-346
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ba' Pham, Margaret B Harrison, Maggie H Chen, Meg E Carley, for the Canadian Bandaging Trial Group

Abstract

Venous leg ulcers, affecting approximately 1% of the population, are costly to manage due to poor healing and high recurrence rates. We evaluated an evidence-informed leg ulcer care protocol with two frequently used high compression systems: 'four-layer bandage' (4LB) and 'short-stretch bandage' (SSB).

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 109 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Ireland 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 105 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 18 17%
Student > Master 16 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 11%
Student > Postgraduate 8 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 6%
Other 17 16%
Unknown 31 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 37 34%
Nursing and Health Professions 19 17%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 4%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 4 4%
Other 9 8%
Unknown 32 29%
Attention Score in Context

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 29 May 2013.
All research outputs
#13,310,807
of 22,711,242 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#4,550
of 7,593 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#92,939
of 172,332 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#61
of 99 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,711,242 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,593 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% 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 172,332 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 99 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.