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 |
Impact of accelerometer data processing decisions on the sample size, wear time and physical activity level of a large cohort study
|
---|---|
Published in |
BMC Public Health, November 2014
|
DOI | 10.1186/1471-2458-14-1210 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Sarah Kozey Keadle, Eric J Shiroma, Patty S Freedson, I-Min Lee |
Abstract |
Accelerometers objectively assess physical activity (PA) and are currently used in several large-scale epidemiological studies, but there is no consensus for processing the data. This study compared the impact of wear-time assessment methods and using either vertical (V)-axis or vector magnitude (VM) cut-points on accelerometer output. |
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 % |
---|---|---|
Australia | 1 | 33% |
United Kingdom | 1 | 33% |
Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 1 | 33% |
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
Scientists | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 190 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Japan | 2 | 1% |
Canada | 1 | <1% |
United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
Spain | 1 | <1% |
Mexico | 1 | <1% |
Unknown | 184 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Ph. D. Student | 41 | 22% |
Student > Master | 32 | 17% |
Researcher | 23 | 12% |
Student > Bachelor | 15 | 8% |
Student > Doctoral Student | 11 | 6% |
Other | 29 | 15% |
Unknown | 39 | 21% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 39 | 21% |
Sports and Recreations | 33 | 17% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 13 | 7% |
Engineering | 10 | 5% |
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 10 | 5% |
Other | 33 | 17% |
Unknown | 52 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 17 March 2019.
All research outputs
#13,183,581
of 22,771,140 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#9,264
of 14,843 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#174,309
of 361,950 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#139
of 224 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,771,140 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,843 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% 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 361,950 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 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 224 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.