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 |
Inability of myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome patients to reproduce VO2peak indicates functional impairment
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Translational Medicine, April 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1479-5876-12-104 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Betsy A Keller, John Luke Pryor, Ludovic Giloteaux |
| Abstract |
Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (ME/CFS) is a multi-system illness characterized, in part, by increased fatigue following minimal exertion, cognitive impairment, poor recovery to physical and other stressors, in addition to other symptoms. Unlike healthy subjects and other diseased populations who reproduce objective physiological measures during repeat cardiopulmonary exercise tests (CPETs), ME/CFS patients have been reported to fail to reproduce results in a second CPET performed one day after an initial CPET. If confirmed, a disparity between a first and second CPET could serve to identify individuals with ME/CFS, would be able to document their extent of disability, and could also provide a physiological basis for prescribing physical activity as well as a metric of functional impairment. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 392 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 | 63 | 16% |
| United States | 56 | 14% |
| Australia | 12 | 3% |
| Spain | 12 | 3% |
| Canada | 12 | 3% |
| Netherlands | 10 | 3% |
| Germany | 9 | 2% |
| Norway | 3 | <1% |
| France | 3 | <1% |
| Other | 20 | 5% |
| Unknown | 192 | 49% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 347 | 89% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 19 | 5% |
| Scientists | 17 | 4% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 8 | 2% |
| Unknown | 1 | <1% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 137 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Norway | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 135 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 25 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 16 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 13 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 7% |
| Other | 8 | 6% |
| Other | 24 | 18% |
| Unknown | 42 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 24 | 18% |
| Sports and Recreations | 12 | 9% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 9 | 7% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 6% |
| Psychology | 8 | 6% |
| Other | 30 | 22% |
| Unknown | 46 | 34% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 353. 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 04 March 2024.
All research outputs
#93,337
of 25,766,791 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Translational Medicine
#18
of 4,712 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#680
of 242,620 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Translational Medicine
#1
of 96 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,766,791 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,712 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 242,620 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 96 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.