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 |
Decision curve analysis revisited: overall net benefit, relationships to ROC curve analysis, and application to case-control studies
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, June 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1472-6947-11-45 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Valentin Rousson, Thomas Zumbrunn |
| Abstract |
Decision curve analysis has been introduced as a method to evaluate prediction models in terms of their clinical consequences if used for a binary classification of subjects into a group who should and into a group who should not be treated. The key concept for this type of evaluation is the "net benefit", a concept borrowed from utility theory. |
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 States | 1 | 33% |
| Canada | 1 | 33% |
| India | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 67% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 106 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 1 | <1% |
| Vietnam | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 100 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 28 | 26% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 18 | 17% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 10 | 9% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 8 | 8% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 8% |
| Other | 19 | 18% |
| Unknown | 15 | 14% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 42 | 40% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 7% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 4% |
| Mathematics | 4 | 4% |
| Other | 22 | 21% |
| Unknown | 22 | 21% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 07 November 2022.
All research outputs
#4,194,992
of 25,498,750 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#335
of 2,147 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,467
of 126,976 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#4
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,498,750 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,147 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 done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 126,976 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 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.