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 |
Using a single question to assess physical activity in older adults: a reliability and validity study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Research Methodology, February 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2288-12-20 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Dawn P Gill, Gareth R Jones, Guangyong Zou, Mark Speechley |
| Abstract |
Single-item physical activity questions provide a quick approximation of physical activity levels. While recall questionnaires provide a more detailed picture of an individual's level of physical activity, single-item questions may be more appropriate in certain situations. The aim of this study was to evaluate two single-item physical activity questions (one absolute question and one relative question) for test-retest reliability, convergent validity, and discriminant validity, in a sample of older adults. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 States | 4 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 85 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 2 | 2% |
| Unknown | 83 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 14 | 16% |
| Researcher | 13 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 9% |
| Professor | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 13 | 15% |
| Unknown | 21 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 21 | 25% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 13 | 15% |
| Sports and Recreations | 9 | 11% |
| Social Sciences | 6 | 7% |
| Psychology | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 8 | 9% |
| Unknown | 23 | 27% |
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 12 April 2012.
All research outputs
#13,360,617
of 22,664,267 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#1,277
of 2,000 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#87,296
of 155,498 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#11
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,664,267 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% 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 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% 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 155,498 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 33 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 66% of its contemporaries.