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 |
Implementation of shared decision making by physician training to optimise hypertension treatment. Study protocol of a cluster-RCT
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Cardiovascular Disorders, September 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2261-12-73 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Iris Tinsel, Anika Buchholz, Werner Vach, Achim Siegel, Thorsten Dürk, Andreas Loh, Angela Buchholz, Wilhelm Niebling, Karl-Georg Fischer |
| Abstract |
Hypertension is one of the key factors causing cardiovascular diseases which make up the most frequent cause of death in industrialised nations. However about 60% of hypertensive patients in Germany treated with antihypertensives do not reach the recommended target blood pressure. The involvement of patients in medical decision making fulfils not only an ethical imperative but, furthermore, has the potential of higher treatment success. One concept to enhance the active role of patients is shared decision making. Until now there exists little information on the effects of shared decision making trainings for general practitioners on patient participation and on lowering blood pressure in hypertensive patients. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| India | 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 161 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 1% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 1% |
| Burkina Faso | 1 | <1% |
| Indonesia | 1 | <1% |
| Argentina | 1 | <1% |
| Ukraine | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 153 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 31 | 19% |
| Researcher | 24 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 17 | 11% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 12 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 11 | 7% |
| Other | 27 | 17% |
| Unknown | 39 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 50 | 31% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 17 | 11% |
| Psychology | 16 | 10% |
| Social Sciences | 9 | 6% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 5 | 3% |
| Other | 15 | 9% |
| Unknown | 49 | 30% |
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 12 September 2012.
All research outputs
#18,314,922
of 22,678,224 outputs
Outputs from BMC Cardiovascular Disorders
#1,094
of 1,589 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#128,375
of 168,561 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Cardiovascular Disorders
#21
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,678,224 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,589 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% 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 168,561 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 33 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.