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 |
A usability and feasibility study of a computerized version of the Bath Adolescent Pain Questionnaire: the BAPQ-C
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Pediatrics, January 2020
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12887-019-1899-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Abbie Jordan, Fiona M. Begen, Lisa Austin, Rhiannon T. Edwards, Hannah Connell |
| Abstract |
Pain is a common experience in adolescence, with up to 44% of adolescents reporting chronic pain. For a significant minority, severe pain becomes an ongoing disabling problem. Treatment of adolescent chronic pain aims to reduce the impact of pain on adolescents' lives. Efficient, accurate assessment of the impact of pain is essential to treatment. The 'Bath Adolescent Pain Questionnaire' (BAPQ) is a psychometrically robust multidimensional self-report measure of adolescent functioning. Whilst widely used, the paper-based format of the BAPQ can present completion difficulties for adolescents experiencing chronic pain. To increase the accessibility and clinical utility of the BAPQ, an electronic version of the measure is needed. This study assesses the usability and feasibility of a computerized version of this measure (BAPQ-C) in an adolescent chronic pain population. Fourteen adolescents (13 females; 13-16 years) were recruited from a hospital-based residential pain management programme. Participants completed a qualitative 'thinking aloud task' whilst completing the BAPQ-C. and, an acceptability questionnaire regarding the BAPQ-C. Data were analysed using thematic analysis, a widely used qualitative method of data analysis . Two themes labelled 'engagement and technological appeal' and 'accessibility and independence' were generated. Themes revealed numerous factors contributing to participants' preference for the BAPQ-C compared with the paper version of the BAPQ. Participants reported that the BAPQ-C was 'quicker' and 'easier' to complete than the BAPQ. Functional aspects of the BAPQ-C which included use of a touch screen rather than a pen and paper, font colours/styles, the zoom function and the spellchecker, provided participants with improved access. This subsequently increased participants' independence and confidence when completing the measure. The BAPQ-C is a feasible multidimensional tool for the assessment of functioning in adolescents who experience chronic pain. It was well-received by participants who were able to complete the measure more quickly, independently and confidently than the paper-based BAPQ. Increased speed, ease and accuracy of completion make the BAPQ-C an ideal tool for use in busy clinical and research settings. Findings highlight the potential benefits of adopting the BAPQ-C when assessing the impact of chronic pain on adolescents in clinic and home-based settings. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 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 | 8 | 57% |
| United States | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 5 | 36% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 8 | 57% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 21% |
| Scientists | 3 | 21% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 49 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 8% |
| Researcher | 3 | 6% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 6% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 9 | 18% |
| Unknown | 20 | 41% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 16% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 12% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 6% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 4% |
| Neuroscience | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 8 | 16% |
| Unknown | 20 | 41% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 16 January 2020.
All research outputs
#3,445,520
of 23,881,329 outputs
Outputs from BMC Pediatrics
#528
of 3,143 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#82,299
of 460,472 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Pediatrics
#18
of 94 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,881,329 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,143 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its peers.
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 460,472 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 94 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.