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 |
Patient-centered, comparative effectiveness of esophageal cancer screening: protocol for a comparative effectiveness research study to inform guidelines for evidence-based approach to screening and surveillance endoscopy
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Health Services Research, August 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1472-6963-12-288 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jennifer R Kramer, Jennifer Arney, John Chen, Peter Richardson, Zhigang Duan, Richard L Street, Marilyn Hinojosa-Lindsey, Aanand D Naik, Hashem B El-Serag |
| Abstract |
The comparative effectiveness (CE) of endoscopic screening (versus no screening) for Barrett's esophagus (BE) in patients with GERD symptoms, or among different endoscopic surveillance strategies in patients with BE, for the early detection of esophageal adenocarcinoma (EA) is unknown. Furthermore, it is unclear if patients or providers have or will adopt any of these strategies (screening only, screening and surveillance, vs. none), irrespective of their effectiveness. Endoscopic screening and surveillance is expensive and can be risky. Therefore, it is imperative to establish the CE and acceptability about the risks and outcomes related to these practices to better inform expert recommendations and provider-patient decisions. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 60% |
| Unknown | 2 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 80% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 61 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 60 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 11 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 10% |
| Other | 4 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 15 | 25% |
| Unknown | 14 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 23 | 38% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 11% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 7% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 4 | 7% |
| Unknown | 17 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 January 2013.
All research outputs
#6,745,437
of 22,678,224 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#3,261
of 7,578 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#49,386
of 170,196 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#44
of 117 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,678,224 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,578 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% 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 170,196 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 117 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its contemporaries.