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 |
Examining the psychometric properties of a sport-related concussion survey: a Rasch measurement approach
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Research Notes, June 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13104-017-2559-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Mark Hecimovich, Ida Marais |
| Abstract |
Awareness of sport-related concussion (SRC) is an essential step in increasing the number of athletes or parents who report on SRC. This awareness is important, as there is no established data on medical care at youth-level sports and may be limited to individuals with only first aid training. In this circumstance, aside from the coach, it is the players and their parents who need to be aware of possible signs and symptoms. The aim of this study was to examine the psychometric properties of a parent and player concussion survey intended for use before and after an education campaign regarding SRC. 1441 questionnaires were received from parents and 284 questionnaires from players. The responses to the sixteen-item section of the questionnaire's 'recognition of signs and symptoms' were submitted to psychometric analysis using the dichotomous and polytomous Rasch model via the Rasch Unidimensional Measurement Model software RUMM2030. The Rasch model of Modern Test Theory can be considered a refinement of, or advance on, traditional analyses of an instrument's psychometric properties. The main finding is that these sixteen items measure two factors: items that are symptoms of concussion and items that are not symptoms of concussion. Parents and athletes were able to identify most or all of the symptoms, but were not as good at distinguishing symptoms that are not symptoms of concussion. Analyzing these responses revealed differential item functioning for parents and athletes on non-symptom items. When the DIF was resolved a significant difference was found between parents and athletes. The main finding is that the items measure two 'dimensions' in concussion symptom recognition. The first dimension consists of those items that are symptoms of concussion and the second dimension of those items that are not symptoms of concussion. Parents and players were able to identify most or all of the symptoms of concussion, so one would not expect to pick up any positive change on these items after an education campaign. Parents and players were not as good at distinguishing symptoms that are not symptoms of concussion. It is on these items that one may possibly expect improvement to manifest, so to evaluate the effectiveness of an education campaign it would pay to look for improvement in distinguishing symptoms that are not symptoms of concussion. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 52 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 52 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 8 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 13% |
| Researcher | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 5 | 10% |
| Unknown | 16 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 15% |
| Psychology | 7 | 13% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 12% |
| Sports and Recreations | 5 | 10% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 5 | 10% |
| Unknown | 19 | 37% |
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 28 June 2017.
All research outputs
#15,466,074
of 22,982,639 outputs
Outputs from BMC Research Notes
#2,334
of 4,284 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#198,514
of 315,536 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Research Notes
#64
of 124 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,982,639 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 4,284 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% 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 315,536 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 124 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.