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 |
Enhancing rigour in the validation of patient reported outcome measures (PROMs): bridging linguistic and psychometric testing
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, June 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1477-7525-10-64 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Gwerfyl Roberts, Seren Roberts, Richard Tranter, Rhiannon Whitaker, Emma Bedson, Siobhan Tranter, Delyth Prys, Heledd Owen, Yvonne Sylvestre |
| Abstract |
A strong consensus exists for a systematic approach to linguistic validation of patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) and discrete methods for assessing their psychometric properties. Despite the need for robust evidence of the appropriateness of measures, transition from linguistic to psychometric validation is poorly documented or evidenced. This paper demonstrates the importance of linking linguistic and psychometric testing through a purposeful stage which bridges the gap between translation and large-scale validation. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| New Zealand | 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 65 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 3% |
| Belgium | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 62 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 12 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 10 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 8% |
| Lecturer | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 17 | 26% |
| Unknown | 11 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 23 | 35% |
| Psychology | 12 | 18% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 9% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 5% |
| Linguistics | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 6 | 9% |
| Unknown | 12 | 18% |
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 14 June 2012.
All research outputs
#20,653,708
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#1,820
of 2,297 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#141,379
of 180,657 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#15
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,297 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.5. 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 180,657 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.