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 |
Clinical practice guidelines within the Southern African development community: a descriptive study of the quality of guideline development and concordance with best evidence for five priority diseases
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Health Research Policy and Systems, January 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1478-4505-10-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Tamara Kredo, Annette Gerritsen, Johan van Heerden, Shaun Conway, Nandi Siegfried |
| Abstract |
Reducing the burden of disease relies on availability of evidence-based clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). There is limited data on availability, quality and content of guidelines within the Southern African Development Community (SADC). This evaluation aims to address this gap in knowledge and provide recommendations for regional guideline development. |
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 135 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Peru | 2 | 1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 130 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 25 | 19% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 20 | 15% |
| Researcher | 15 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 7% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 8 | 6% |
| Other | 29 | 21% |
| Unknown | 29 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 48 | 36% |
| Social Sciences | 13 | 10% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 12 | 9% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 5% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 5 | 4% |
| Other | 16 | 12% |
| Unknown | 34 | 25% |
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 03 June 2012.
All research outputs
#16,898,821
of 24,848,516 outputs
Outputs from Health Research Policy and Systems
#1,180
of 1,338 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#173,973
of 254,277 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health Research Policy and Systems
#9
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,848,516 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,338 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.9. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% 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 254,277 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.