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 |
Evaluation of clinical practice guidelines using the AGREE instrument: comparison between data obtained from AGREE I and AGREE II
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Research Notes, December 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13104-017-3041-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kanako Seto, Kunichika Matsumoto, Takefumi Kitazawa, Shigeru Fujita, Shimpei Hanaoka, Tomonori Hasegawa |
| Abstract |
The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) is a representative, quantitative evaluation tool for evidence-based clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). Recently, AGREE was revised (AGREE II). The continuity of evaluation data obtained from the original version (AGREE I) has not yet been demonstrated. The present study investigated the relationship between data obtained from AGREE I and AGREE II to evaluate the continuity between the two measurement tools. An evaluation team consisting of three trained librarians evaluated 68 CPGs issued in 2011-2012 in Japan using AGREE I and AGREE II. The correlation coefficients for the six domains were: (1) scope and purpose 0.758; (2) stakeholder involvement 0.708; (3) rigor of development 0.982; (4) clarity of presentation 0.702; (5) applicability 0.919; and (6) editorial independence 0.971. The item "Overall Guideline Assessment" was newly introduced in AGREE II. This global item had a correlation coefficient of 0.628 using the six AGREE I domains, and 0.685 using the 23 items. Our results suggest that data obtained from AGREE I can be transferred to AGREE II, and the "Overall Guideline Assessment" data can be determined with high reliability using a standardized score of the 23 items. |
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 | 1 | 33% |
| United States | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Scientists | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 24 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 4 | 17% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 13% |
| Other | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 4 | 17% |
| Unknown | 4 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 29% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 29% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 8% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 4% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 5 | 21% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 01 April 2022.
All research outputs
#14,371,332
of 23,466,057 outputs
Outputs from BMC Research Notes
#1,891
of 4,308 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#232,594
of 442,135 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Research Notes
#78
of 197 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,466,057 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,308 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% 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 442,135 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 197 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 57% of its contemporaries.