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 |
Formal and informal prediction of recurrent stroke and myocardial infarction after stroke: a systematic review and evaluation of clinical prediction models in a new cohort
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medicine, April 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1741-7015-12-58 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Douglas D Thompson, Gordon D Murray, Martin Dennis, Cathie LM Sudlow, William N Whiteley |
| Abstract |
The objective of this study was to: (1) systematically review the reporting and methods used in the development of clinical prediction models for recurrent stroke or myocardial infarction (MI) after ischemic stroke; (2) to meta-analyze their external performance; and (3) to compare clinical prediction models to informal clinicians' prediction in the Edinburgh Stroke Study (ESS). |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 1 | 25% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 82 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
| Portugal | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 80 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 13% |
| Researcher | 11 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 11 | 13% |
| Other | 7 | 9% |
| Unspecified | 7 | 9% |
| Other | 19 | 23% |
| Unknown | 16 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 35 | 43% |
| Unspecified | 7 | 9% |
| Neuroscience | 5 | 6% |
| Computer Science | 4 | 5% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 8 | 10% |
| Unknown | 19 | 23% |
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 22 February 2017.
All research outputs
#13,913,047
of 22,751,628 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medicine
#2,856
of 3,413 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#116,406
of 226,135 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medicine
#46
of 50 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,751,628 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 3,413 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 43.5. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% 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 226,135 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 50 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.