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 |
A Bayesian framework for estimating the incremental value of a diagnostic test in the absence of a gold standard
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Research Methodology, May 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2288-14-67 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Daphne I Ling, Madhukar Pai, Ian Schiller, Nandini Dendukuri |
| Abstract |
The absence of a gold standard, i.e., a diagnostic reference standard having perfect sensitivity and specificity, is a common problem in clinical practice and in diagnostic research studies. There is a need for methods to estimate the incremental value of a new, imperfect test in this context. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 2% |
| Canada | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 61 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 13 | 21% |
| Researcher | 11 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 14% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 14 | 22% |
| Unknown | 7 | 11% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 21 | 33% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 8 | 13% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 3 | 5% |
| Mathematics | 3 | 5% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 9 | 14% |
| Unknown | 16 | 25% |
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 08 July 2014.
All research outputs
#14,655,143
of 22,758,248 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#1,432
of 2,009 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#125,852
of 226,946 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#20
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,758,248 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,009 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% 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 226,946 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.