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.
Twitter Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Development and validation of a new patient-reported outcome measure for patients with pressure ulcers: the PU-QOL instrument
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, January 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1477-7525-11-95 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Claudia Gorecki, Julia M Brown, Stefan Cano, Donna L Lamping, Michelle Briggs, Susanne Coleman, Carol Dealey, Elizabeth McGinnis, Andrea E Nelson, Nikki Stubbs, Lyn Wilson, Jane Nixon |
| Abstract |
Patient-reported outcome (PRO) data are integral to patient care, policy decision making and healthcare delivery. PRO assessment in pressure ulcers is in its infancy, with few studies including PROs as study outcomes. Further, there are no pressure ulcer PRO instruments available. |
Twitter Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 67% |
| Spain | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 107 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Switzerland | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 104 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 17 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 14 | 13% |
| Researcher | 11 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 11 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 6% |
| Other | 20 | 19% |
| Unknown | 28 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 25 | 23% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 25 | 23% |
| Social Sciences | 8 | 7% |
| Psychology | 4 | 4% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 9 | 8% |
| Unknown | 34 | 32% |
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 22 January 2014.
All research outputs
#13,386,010
of 22,712,476 outputs
Outputs from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#1,025
of 2,154 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#158,260
of 280,743 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#44
of 125 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,712,476 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 2,154 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 50% 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 280,743 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 125 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 64% of its contemporaries.