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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Development and validation of a pharmacy migraine questionnaire to assess suitability for treatment with a triptan
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
The Journal of Headache and Pain, October 2008
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10194-008-0070-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Hans-Christoph Diener, Andrew Dowson, Susan Whicker, Teresa Bacon |
| Abstract |
A questionnaire (Migraine Questionnaire; MQ) was developed to help pharmacists identify consumers with migraine suitable for non-prescription treatment with a triptan. Adults, who knew or thought that they had migraine, participated in three, sequential, community-based studies to validate the MQ. Overall, 1,353 subjects completed independent assessments with a pharmacist and a clinician (reference standard). The accuracy of the pharmacist assessment of suitability for a triptan was compared with the clinician assessment. Clinicians using their standard practice determined that triptan therapy was suitable in 76.8% of cases compared with 48.8% for pharmacists using the MQ. The lack of concordance between pharmacists and clinicians in the false-positive cases (n = 113 of 660 subjects considered suitable for triptan by the pharmacists) usually related to headache diagnosis (57.5%), not safety aspects. The MQ is an effective tool for pharmacists to guide appropriate recommendation of a non-prescription triptan for migraine. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 23 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 26% |
| Researcher | 5 | 22% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 13% |
| Professor | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 4 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 35% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 7 | 30% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 4% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 4% |
| Psychology | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 4 | 17% |
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 25 November 2008.
All research outputs
#16,069,695
of 23,849,058 outputs
Outputs from The Journal of Headache and Pain
#1,057
of 1,417 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#79,056
of 93,098 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The Journal of Headache and Pain
#3
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,849,058 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 1,417 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.6. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% 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 93,098 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.