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 |
Printed educational messages aimed at family practitioners fail to increase retinal screening among their patients with diabetes: a pragmatic cluster randomized controlled trial [ISRCTN72772651]
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Implementation Science, August 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1748-5908-9-87 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Merrick Zwarenstein, Susan K Shiller, Ruth Croxford, Jeremy M Grimshaw, Diane Kelsall, J Michael Paterson, Andreas Laupacis, Peter C Austin, Karen Tu, Lingsong Yun, Janet E Hux |
| Abstract |
Evidence of the effectiveness of printed educational messages in narrowing the gap between guideline recommendations and practice is contradictory. Failure to screen for retinopathy exposes primary care patients with diabetes to risk of eye complications. Screening is initiated by referral from family practitioners but adherence to guidelines is suboptimal. We aimed to evaluate the ability of printed educational messages aimed at family doctors to increase retinal screening of primary care patients with diabetes. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 19 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 4 | 21% |
| Canada | 4 | 21% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 11% |
| United States | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 8 | 42% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 11 | 58% |
| Scientists | 5 | 26% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 11% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 5% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 99 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 98 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 15 | 15% |
| Researcher | 13 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 13 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 10% |
| Librarian | 4 | 4% |
| Other | 19 | 19% |
| Unknown | 25 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 37 | 37% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 13 | 13% |
| Social Sciences | 7 | 7% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 2% |
| Psychology | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 8 | 8% |
| Unknown | 30 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 21. 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 21 August 2014.
All research outputs
#1,803,310
of 25,820,938 outputs
Outputs from Implementation Science
#331
of 1,822 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,592
of 242,453 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Implementation Science
#4
of 38 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,820,938 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,822 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 242,453 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 38 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.