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.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
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 |
Debate: The slippery slope of surrogate outcomes
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Trials, October 2000
|
| DOI | 10.1186/cvm-1-2-076 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ralph B D'Agostino |
| Abstract |
Surrogate outcomes are frequently used in cardiovascular disease research. A concern is that changes in surrogate markers may not reflect changes in disease outcomes. Two recent clinical trials (Heart and Estrogen/Progestin Replacement Study [HERS], and the Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial [ALLHAT]) underscore this problem since their results contradicted what was expected based on the surrogate outcomes. The current regulatory policy to allow new therapies to be introduced onto the market based solely on surrogate outcomes may need to be reviewed. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 25% |
| Chile | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Scientists | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 3% |
| Colombia | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 28 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 6 | 20% |
| Professor | 3 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 10% |
| Other | 7 | 23% |
| Unknown | 5 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 13 | 43% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 7% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Chemical Engineering | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 4 | 13% |
| Unknown | 8 | 27% |
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 06 April 2020.
All research outputs
#3,718,041
of 25,986,827 outputs
Outputs from Trials
#45
of 45 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,614
of 39,785 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Trials
#1
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,986,827 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 45 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.2. This one scored the same or higher as 0 of them.
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 39,785 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them