↓ Skip to main content

Validation of the Chinese EORTC chronic lymphocytic leukaemia module – application of classical test theory and item response theory

Overview of attention for article published in Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, April 2020
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
51 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
Validation of the Chinese EORTC chronic lymphocytic leukaemia module – application of classical test theory and item response theory
Published in
Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, April 2020
DOI 10.1186/s12955-020-01341-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Dong Dong, Jun Jin, Simone Oerlemans, Siyue Yu, Shenmiao Yang, Jianfeng Zhu, Richard Huan Xu

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users 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 51 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 51 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 4 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 6%
Professor 2 4%
Student > Bachelor 2 4%
Lecturer 2 4%
Other 7 14%
Unknown 31 61%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 6 12%
Psychology 3 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 4%
Computer Science 2 4%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 2%
Other 5 10%
Unknown 32 63%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 09 April 2020.
All research outputs
#4,004,946
of 23,201,298 outputs
Outputs from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#401
of 2,194 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#88,647
of 373,018 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#16
of 77 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,201,298 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,194 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 373,018 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 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 77 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.