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.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
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 |
The development of QUADAS: a tool for the quality assessment of studies of diagnostic accuracy included in systematic reviews
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Research Methodology, November 2003
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2288-3-25 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Penny Whiting, Anne WS Rutjes, Johannes B Reitsma, Patrick MM Bossuyt, Jos Kleijnen |
| Abstract |
In the era of evidence based medicine, with systematic reviews as its cornerstone, adequate quality assessment tools should be available. There is currently a lack of a systematically developed and evaluated tool for the assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies. The aim of this project was to combine empirical evidence and expert opinion in a formal consensus method to develop a tool to be used in systematic reviews to assess the quality of primary studies of diagnostic accuracy. |
X Demographics
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 1,432 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 12 | <1% |
| United States | 11 | <1% |
| Canada | 8 | <1% |
| Germany | 7 | <1% |
| Spain | 6 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 6 | <1% |
| Brazil | 5 | <1% |
| Colombia | 4 | <1% |
| France | 3 | <1% |
| Other | 22 | 2% |
| Unknown | 1348 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 206 | 14% |
| Researcher | 198 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 196 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 124 | 9% |
| Other | 117 | 8% |
| Other | 381 | 27% |
| Unknown | 210 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 675 | 47% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 101 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 68 | 5% |
| Psychology | 47 | 3% |
| Social Sciences | 40 | 3% |
| Other | 223 | 16% |
| Unknown | 278 | 19% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 39. 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 13 July 2021.
All research outputs
#1,117,117
of 26,388,722 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#108
of 2,379 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,098
of 61,504 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#2
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,388,722 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,379 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 61,504 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.