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 |
[Cost]effectiveness of withdrawal of fall-risk increasing drugs versus conservative treatment in older fallers: design of a multicenter randomized controlled trial (IMPROveFALL-study)
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Geriatrics, August 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2318-11-48 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Klaas A Hartholt, Nicole DA Boyé, Nathalie Van der Velde, Esther MM Van Lieshout, Suzanne Polinder, Oscar J De Vries, Albert JH Kerver, Gijsbertus Ziere, Milko MM Bruijninckx, Mark R De Vries, Francesco US Mattace-Raso, André G Uitterlinden, Ed F Van Beeck, Paul Lips, Peter Patka, Tischa JM Van der Cammen |
| Abstract |
Fall incidents represent an increasing public health problem in aging societies worldwide. A major risk factor for falls is the use of fall-risk increasing drugs. The primary aim of the study is to compare the effect of a structured medication assessment including the withdrawal of fall-risk increasing drugs on the number of new falls versus 'care as usual' in older adults presenting at the Emergency Department after a fall. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 91 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 2% |
| Indonesia | 1 | 1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 1% |
| Brazil | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 86 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 17 | 19% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 14 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 13 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 5% |
| Other | 15 | 16% |
| Unknown | 17 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 30 | 33% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 13 | 14% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 6 | 7% |
| Sports and Recreations | 5 | 5% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 15 | 16% |
| Unknown | 19 | 21% |
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 27 November 2016.
All research outputs
#15,751,194
of 23,394,907 outputs
Outputs from BMC Geriatrics
#2,403
of 3,160 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#88,384
of 125,378 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Geriatrics
#15
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,394,907 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,160 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.9. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% 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 125,378 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.