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 |
Surgeon’s experiences of receiving peer benchmarked feedback using patient-reported outcome measures: a qualitative study
|
---|---|
Published in |
Implementation Science, June 2014
|
DOI | 10.1186/1748-5908-9-84 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Maria B Boyce, John P Browne, Joanne Greenhalgh |
Abstract |
The use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) to provide healthcare professionals with peer benchmarked feedback is growing. However, there is little evidence on the opinions of professionals on the value of this information in practice. The purpose of this research is to explore surgeon's experiences of receiving peer benchmarked PROMs feedback and to examine whether this information led to changes in their practice. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Canada | 2 | 15% |
Ireland | 1 | 8% |
United Kingdom | 1 | 8% |
Portugal | 1 | 8% |
Unknown | 8 | 62% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 10 | 77% |
Scientists | 2 | 15% |
Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 8% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 56 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Spain | 1 | 2% |
Unknown | 55 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 21% |
Researcher | 8 | 14% |
Other | 8 | 14% |
Student > Master | 5 | 9% |
Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 5% |
Other | 7 | 13% |
Unknown | 13 | 23% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 21 | 38% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 11% |
Social Sciences | 4 | 7% |
Psychology | 3 | 5% |
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 2% |
Other | 4 | 7% |
Unknown | 17 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 31 July 2014.
All research outputs
#4,003,321
of 22,757,541 outputs
Outputs from Implementation Science
#808
of 1,721 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#39,611
of 227,675 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Implementation Science
#13
of 37 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,757,541 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,721 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% 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 227,675 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 37 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 64% of its contemporaries.