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 |
Practice guidelines and clinical risk assessment models: is it time to reform?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, October 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1472-6947-11-63 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Nariman Sepehrvand, Firouz Ghaderi Pakdel, Mohammad Hosein Rahimi-Rad, Babak Moosavi-Toomatari, Shahrzad Bazargan-Hejazi |
| Abstract |
Clinical practice guidelines and Risk Assessment Models (RAMs) are some useful tools to bring medical evidences into our daily clinical practice. Despite the improvement over the time, they still have some shortcomings. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
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 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Iran, Islamic Republic of | 1 | 4% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 24 | 92% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 5 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 15% |
| Other | 3 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 4 | 15% |
| Unknown | 4 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 42% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 12% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 7 | 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 12 December 2017.
All research outputs
#7,409,591
of 22,655,397 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#761
of 1,978 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#46,466
of 139,128 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#6
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,655,397 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,978 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% 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 139,128 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 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 58% of its contemporaries.