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 CONSORT Patient-Reported Outcome (PRO) extension: implications for clinical trials and practice
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, October 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1477-7525-11-184 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Melanie Calvert, Michael Brundage, Paul B Jacobsen, Holger J Schünemann, Fabio Efficace |
| Abstract |
To inform clinical guidelines and patient care we need high quality evidence on the relative benefits and harms of intervention. Patient reported outcome (PRO) data from clinical trials can "empower patients to make decisions based on their values" and "level the playing field between physician and patient". While clinicians have a good understanding of the concept of health-related quality of life and other PROs, evidence suggests that many do not feel comfortable in using the data from trials to inform discussions with patients and clinical practice. This may in part reflect concerns over the integrity of the data and difficulties in interpreting the results arising from poor reporting.The new CONSORT PRO extension aims to improve the reporting of PROs in trials to facilitate the use of results to inform clinical practice and health policy. While the CONSORT PRO extension is an important first step in the process, we need broader engagement with the guidance to facilitate optimal reporting and maximize use of PRO data in a clinical setting. Endorsement by journal editors, authors and peer reviewers are crucial steps. Improved design, implementation and transparent reporting of PROs in clinical trials are necessary to provide high quality evidence to inform evidence synthesis and clinical practice guidelines. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 20% |
| Australia | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 3 | 60% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 2 | 40% |
| Members of the public | 2 | 40% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 90 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
| Canada | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 88 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 19 | 21% |
| Researcher | 17 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 9% |
| Other | 5 | 6% |
| Unspecified | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 15 | 17% |
| Unknown | 21 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 31 | 34% |
| Psychology | 8 | 9% |
| Unspecified | 5 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 5 | 6% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 9 | 10% |
| Unknown | 30 | 33% |
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 19 November 2013.
All research outputs
#12,825,636
of 22,727,570 outputs
Outputs from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#951
of 2,155 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#106,233
of 212,671 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#2
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,727,570 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,155 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 55% 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 212,671 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.