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 |
Patient reported outcome measures for visual impairment after stroke: a systematic review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, September 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12955-015-0338-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Lauren R. Hepworth, Fiona J. Rowe, Robert Harper, Kathryn Jarvis, Tracey Shipman, Helen Rodgers |
| Abstract |
The aim of this review was to identify patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) for use in research and clinical practice involving individuals with visual impairment following stroke and to evaluate their content validity against quality assessment criteria. A systematic review of the literature was conducted to identify articles related to the development and/or validation of PROMS. We searched scholarly online resources and hand searched journals. Search terms included MESH terms and alternatives relating to PROMs, visual impairments and quality of life. Data were extracted relating to the development and validation of the included instruments. The quality of the development process was assessed using a modified version of a PROM quality assessment tool. A total of 142 PROMs were identified, 34 vision-specific PROMs were relevant and available to be analysed in this review. Quality appraisal identified four highly rated instruments: the National Eye Institute Visual Functional Questionnaire (NEI-VFQ), Activity Inventory (AI), Daily Living Tasks Dependant on Vision (DLTV) and Veterans Affairs Low Visual Function Questionnaire (VA LV VFQ). The four instruments have only been used with either a limited number of stroke survivors or a sub-population within visual impairment following stroke. No instruments were identified which specifically targeted individuals with visual impairment following stroke. Further research is required to identify the items which a population of stroke survivors with visual impairment consider to be of most importance. The validation of a combination of instruments or a new instrument for use with this population is required. |
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 | 2 | 67% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 88 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Belgium | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 87 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 15 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 12 | 14% |
| Researcher | 10 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 9% |
| Lecturer | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 13 | 15% |
| Unknown | 26 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 18 | 20% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 14 | 16% |
| Neuroscience | 8 | 9% |
| Psychology | 7 | 8% |
| Social Sciences | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 8 | 9% |
| Unknown | 28 | 32% |
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 07 March 2016.
All research outputs
#14,238,195
of 22,828,180 outputs
Outputs from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#1,130
of 2,158 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#139,038
of 268,887 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#15
of 59 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,828,180 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 2,158 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% 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 268,887 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 59 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 62% of its contemporaries.