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 |
Adjusting for geographic variation in observational comparative effectiveness studies: a case study of antipsychotics using state Medicaid data
|
---|---|
Published in |
BMC Health Services Research, August 2014
|
DOI | 10.1186/1472-6963-14-355 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Elisabeth Dowling Root, Deborah SK Thomas, Elizabeth J Campagna, Elaine H Morrato |
Abstract |
Area-level variation in treatment and outcomes may be a potential source of confounding bias in observational comparative effectiveness studies. This paper demonstrates how to use exploratory spatial data analysis (ESDA) and spatial statistical methods to investigate and control for these potential biases. The case presented compares the effectiveness of two antipsychotic treatment strategies: oral second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs) vs. long-acting paliperiodone palmitate (PP). |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Unknown | 32 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Researcher | 9 | 28% |
Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 16% |
Student > Master | 4 | 13% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 9% |
Other | 2 | 6% |
Other | 2 | 6% |
Unknown | 7 | 22% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 22% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 13% |
Social Sciences | 4 | 13% |
Psychology | 2 | 6% |
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 6% |
Other | 2 | 6% |
Unknown | 11 | 34% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 August 2014.
All research outputs
#18,376,927
of 22,761,738 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#6,456
of 7,618 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#168,400
of 236,468 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#108
of 124 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,761,738 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,618 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% 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 236,468 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 124 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.