↓ Skip to main content

Retrospective evaluation versus population norms for the measurement of baseline health status

Overview of attention for article published in Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, June 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
60 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
43 Mendeley
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.
Title
Retrospective evaluation versus population norms for the measurement of baseline health status
Published in
Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, June 2012
DOI 10.1186/1477-7525-10-68
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ross Wilson, Sarah Derrett, Paul Hansen, John Langley

Abstract

Patient recall or the application of population norms are commonly used methods to estimate (unobservable) health status prior to acute-onset illness or injury; however, both measures are potentially subject to bias. This article reports tests of the validity of both approaches, and discusses the implications for reporting changes in health-related quality of life following acute-onset illness or injury.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Sweden 1 2%
Unknown 42 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 6 14%
Other 5 12%
Student > Bachelor 3 7%
Researcher 3 7%
Student > Postgraduate 2 5%
Other 6 14%
Unknown 18 42%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 23%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 7%
Social Sciences 3 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 5%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 5%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 21 49%
Attention Score in Context

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 15 June 2012.
All research outputs
#20,655,488
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#1,820
of 2,297 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#141,726
of 181,090 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#16
of 19 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 181,090 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 19 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.