↓ Skip to main content

The CARE (CAse REport) guidelines and the standardization of case reports

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Medical Case Reports, November 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (67th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
43 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
76 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
The CARE (CAse REport) guidelines and the standardization of case reports
Published in
Journal of Medical Case Reports, November 2013
DOI 10.1186/1752-1947-7-261
Pubmed ID
Authors

Richard A Rison, Michael R Kidd, Christian A Koch

Abstract

Case reports comprise the core of Journal of Medical Case Reports, are a time-honored tradition firmly established within the medical literature, and represent a growing importance of valuable clinical medical information in our modern information-flowing times. While there is already a body of published literature on how and when to write a case report and both Journal of Medical Case Reports and BioMed Central make known their own criteria, case report quality across all of the medical literature is still variable. Additionally, although health reporting agencies do have standardization guidelines for other aspects of health-care reporting, there has never been an organizational body responsible for international standardization of how to write a case report. With the newly-published CARE (CAse REport) guidelines, Gagnier and colleagues hope to change this. This editorial serves as a brief introduction to the CARE guidelines and briefly examines the proposed standardization of case reports. We invite feedback on the CARE guidelines from all of our readers and encourage their trial run implementation by our own case report authors.

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 76 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Bangladesh 2 3%
France 1 1%
United Kingdom 1 1%
Canada 1 1%
Spain 1 1%
Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of 1 1%
Unknown 69 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 13 17%
Researcher 11 14%
Student > Postgraduate 11 14%
Other 10 13%
Student > Bachelor 7 9%
Other 19 25%
Unknown 5 7%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 47 62%
Psychology 3 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 3%
Other 8 11%
Unknown 10 13%
Attention Score in Context

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 26 October 2018.
All research outputs
#13,902,939
of 22,733,113 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Medical Case Reports
#1,013
of 3,894 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#172,984
of 306,502 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Medical Case Reports
#8
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,733,113 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,894 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% 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 306,502 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 28 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 67% of its contemporaries.