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 quality of clinical practice guidelines in traditional medicine in Korea: appraisal using the AGREE II instrument
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Implementation Science, July 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13012-015-0294-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Tae-Young Choi, Jiae Choi, Ju Ah Lee, Ji Hee Jun, Bongki Park, Myeong Soo Lee |
| Abstract |
This study aimed to evaluate the quality of the current clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) in traditional medicine (TM) in South Korea using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II instrument to further enhance the CPG development. A search was performed for guidelines in Korea from inception until March 2014 in the major Korean guideline websites [the Korean Medical Guideline Information Centre (KoMGI), the Korean Guideline Clearing House (KGC)], PubMed and seven Korean electronic databases; the Association of Korean Oriental Medicine (AKOM) was also consulted. Five independent assessors rated the quality of each CPG using the AGREE II instrument and calculated the mean score of each AGREE item. The overall agreement amongst reviewers was evaluated using the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC). Initially, 17 CPGs were examined for TM in Korea, and only 8 CPGs satisfied the inclusion criteria. The mean scores for each AGREE II domain were as follows: (1) scope and purpose, 60.0 % (CIs, 45.05-74.94 %); (2) stakeholder involvement, 56.11 % (41.28-70.94 %); (3) rigour of development, 42.7 % (23.48-61.92 %); (4) clarity and presentation, 62.50 % (50.89-74.10 %); (5) applicability, 20.31 % (13.96-26.66 %); and (6) editorial independence, 44.58 % (10.78-78.38 %). All of the CPGs were rated as "recommended with provisos or modifications". The ICC values for CPG appraisal using the AGREE II ranged from 0.230 to 0.993. To improve clinical practice and health outcomes, well-developed CPGs are needed. The quality of CPGs for TM in Korea has remained suboptimal according to the AGREE II instrument evaluation. Therefore, guideline developers in Korea should make more of an effort to ensure high-quality CPGs. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 2% |
| Brazil | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 44 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 14 | 30% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 13% |
| Other | 5 | 11% |
| Librarian | 4 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 8 | 17% |
| Unknown | 6 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 23 | 50% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 7% |
| Psychology | 2 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 2% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 4 | 9% |
| Unknown | 12 | 26% |
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 28 July 2015.
All research outputs
#14,690,968
of 22,818,766 outputs
Outputs from Implementation Science
#1,529
of 1,721 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#142,769
of 263,394 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Implementation Science
#38
of 50 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,818,766 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,721 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.7. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% 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 263,394 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 50 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.