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 |
The development of a web- and a print-based decision aid for prostate cancer screening
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, March 2010
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1472-6947-10-12 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Caroline S Dorfman, Randi M Williams, Elisabeth C Kassan, Sara N Red, David L Dawson, William Tuong, Elizabeth R Parker, Janet Ohene-Frempong, Kimberly M Davis, Alexander H Krist, Steven H Woolf, Marc D Schwartz, Mary B Fishman, Carmella Cole, Kathryn L Taylor |
| Abstract |
Whether early detection and treatment of prostate cancer (PCa) will reduce disease-related mortality remains uncertain. As a result, tools are needed to facilitate informed decision making. While there have been several decision aids (DAs) developed and tested, very few have included an exercise to help men clarify their values and preferences about PCa screening. Further, only one DA has utilized an interactive web-based format, which allows for an expansion and customization of the material. We describe the development of two DAs, a booklet and an interactive website, each with a values clarification component and designed for use in diverse settings. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| India | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 142 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 4 | 3% |
| Canada | 2 | 1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 135 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 22 | 15% |
| Researcher | 19 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 18 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 15 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 11 | 8% |
| Other | 35 | 25% |
| Unknown | 22 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 47 | 33% |
| Psychology | 14 | 10% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 13 | 9% |
| Social Sciences | 8 | 6% |
| Computer Science | 7 | 5% |
| Other | 21 | 15% |
| Unknown | 32 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 August 2013.
All research outputs
#15,274,055
of 22,713,403 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#1,307
of 1,982 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#76,348
of 93,393 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#11
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,713,403 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,982 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% 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 93,393 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.