↓ Skip to main content

Involving patient in the early stages of health technology assessment (HTA): a study protocol

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, June 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (90th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
23 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
133 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
Involving patient in the early stages of health technology assessment (HTA): a study protocol
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, June 2014
DOI 10.1186/1472-6963-14-273
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marie-Pierre Gagnon, Bernard Candas, Marie Desmartis, Johanne Gagnon, Daniel La Roche, Marc Rhainds, Martin Coulombe, Mylène Tantchou Dipankui, France Légaré

Abstract

Public and patient involvement in the different stages of the health technology assessment (HTA) process is increasingly encouraged. The selection of topics for assessment, which includes identifying and prioritizing HTA questions, is a constant challenge for HTA agencies because the number of technologies requiring an assessment exceeds the resources available. Public and patient involvement in these early stages of HTA could make assessments more relevant and acceptable to them. Involving them in the development of the assessment plan is also crucial to optimize their influence and impact on HTA research. The project objectives are: 1) setting up interventions to promote patient participation in three stages of the HTA process: identification of HTA topics, prioritization, and development of the assessment plan of the topic prioritized; and 2) assessing the impact of patient participation on the relevance of the topics suggested, the prioritization process, and the assessment plan from the point of view of patients and other groups involved in HTA.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 23 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 133 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 2%
Brazil 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 126 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 30 23%
Student > Master 22 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 8%
Professor 9 7%
Other 23 17%
Unknown 22 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 37 28%
Nursing and Health Professions 18 14%
Social Sciences 15 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 5%
Psychology 6 5%
Other 27 20%
Unknown 24 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 23 March 2017.
All research outputs
#2,103,651
of 22,757,541 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#833
of 7,617 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#22,447
of 228,326 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#11
of 129 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,757,541 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,617 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 228,326 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 129 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 91% of its contemporaries.