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 |
Factors associated with attrition in a longitudinal online study: results from the HaBIDS panel
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Research Methodology, August 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12874-017-0408-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Nicole Rübsamen, Manas K. Akmatov, Stefanie Castell, André Karch, Rafael T. Mikolajczyk |
| Abstract |
Knowing about predictors of attrition in a panel is important to initiate early measures against loss of participants. We investigated attrition in both early and late phase of an online panel with special focus on preferences regarding mode of participation. We used data from the HaBIDS panel that was designed to investigate knowledge, attitudes, and practice regarding infections in the German general population. HaBIDS was divided into two phases: an initial phase when some participants could choose their preferred mode of participation (paper-and-pencil or online) and an extended phase when participants were asked to become members of an online panel that was not limited regarding its duration (i.e. participants initially preferring paper questionnaires switched to online participation). Using competing risks regression, we investigated two types of attrition (formal withdrawal and discontinuation without withdrawal) among online participants, separately for both phases. As potential predictors of attrition, we considered sociodemographic characteristics, physical and mental health as well as auxiliary information describing the survey process, and, in the extended phase, initial mode preference. In the initial phase, higher age and less frequent Internet usage predicted withdrawal, while younger age, higher stress levels, delay in returning the consent form, and need for receiving reminder emails predicted discontinuation. In the extended phase, only need for receiving reminder emails predicted discontinuation. Numbers of withdrawal in the extended phase were too small for analysis. Initial mode preference did not predict attrition in the extended phase. Besides age, there was no evidence of differential attrition by sociodemographic factors in any phase. Predictors of attrition were similar in both phases of the panel, but they differed by type of attrition (withdrawal vs. discontinuation). Sociodemographic characteristics only played a minor role for both types of attrition. Need for receiving a reminder was the strongest predictor of discontinuation in any phase, but no predictor of withdrawal. We found predictors of attrition, which can be identified already in the early phase of a panel so that countermeasures (e.g. special incentives) can be taken. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 States | 4 | 44% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 22% |
| Unknown | 3 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 7 | 78% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 11% |
| Scientists | 1 | 11% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 55 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 55 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 18% |
| Researcher | 9 | 16% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 9% |
| Other | 4 | 7% |
| Unknown | 17 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 13% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 7% |
| Psychology | 4 | 7% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 5% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 9 | 16% |
| Unknown | 26 | 47% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 03 December 2017.
All research outputs
#6,807,498
of 23,005,189 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#1,012
of 2,028 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#106,699
of 316,377 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#16
of 41 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,005,189 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,028 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 49th percentile – i.e., 49% 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 316,377 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 41 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 60% of its contemporaries.