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 |
The MAPP research network: design, patient characterization and operations
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Urology, August 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2490-14-58 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
J Richard Landis, David A Williams, M Scott Lucia, Daniel J Clauw, Bruce D Naliboff, Nancy A Robinson, Adrie van Bokhoven, Siobhan Sutcliffe, Anthony J Schaeffer, Larissa V Rodriguez, Emeran A Mayer, H Henry Lai, John N Krieger, Karl J Kreder, Niloofar Afari, Gerald L Andriole, Catherine S Bradley, James W Griffith, David J Klumpp, Barry A Hong, Susan K Lutgendorf, Dedra Buchwald, Claire C Yang, Sean Mackey, Michel A Pontari, Philip Hanno, John W Kusek, Chris Mullins, J Quentin Clemens, The MAPP Research Network Study Group |
| Abstract |
The "Multidisciplinary Approach to the Study of Chronic Pelvic Pain" (MAPP) Research Network was established by the NIDDK to better understand the pathophysiology of urologic chronic pelvic pain syndromes (UCPPS), to inform future clinical trials and improve clinical care. The evolution, organization, and scientific scope of the MAPP Research Network, and the unique approach of the network's central study and common data elements are described. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 | 2 | 67% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 162 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 5 | 3% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 156 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 29 | 18% |
| Researcher | 21 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 16 | 10% |
| Other | 15 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 6% |
| Other | 38 | 23% |
| Unknown | 33 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 44 | 27% |
| Psychology | 21 | 13% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 15 | 9% |
| Neuroscience | 11 | 7% |
| Social Sciences | 5 | 3% |
| Other | 21 | 13% |
| Unknown | 45 | 28% |
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 28 June 2017.
All research outputs
#2,120,572
of 22,759,618 outputs
Outputs from BMC Urology
#38
of 748 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#22,737
of 229,519 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Urology
#1
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,759,618 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 748 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 229,519 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 16 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 93% of its contemporaries.