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 |
Quality assessment of expert answers to lay questions about cystic fibrosis from various language zones in Europe: the ECORN-CF project
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Research Methodology, February 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2288-12-11 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Daniela d'Alquen, Kris De Boeck, Judy Bradley, Věra Vávrová, Birgit Dembski, Thomas OF Wagner, Annette Pfalz, Helge Hebestreit |
| Abstract |
The European Centres of Reference Network for Cystic Fibrosis (ECORN-CF) established an Internet forum which provides the opportunity for CF patients and other interested people to ask experts questions about CF in their mother language. The objectives of this study were to: 1) develop a detailed quality assessment tool to analyze quality of expert answers, 2) evaluate the intra- and inter-rater agreement of this tool, and 3) explore changes in the quality of expert answers over the time frame of the project. |
X Demographics
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.
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 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Malaysia | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 27 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 6 | 21% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 14% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 11% |
| Other | 4 | 14% |
| Unknown | 3 | 11% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 13 | 46% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 7% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 4% |
| Psychology | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 3 | 11% |
| Unknown | 6 | 21% |
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 07 February 2012.
All research outputs
#20,154,661
of 22,662,201 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#1,863
of 2,000 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#224,217
of 247,832 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#26
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,662,201 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,000 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 247,832 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.