↓ Skip to main content

A comparison of the Doppler ultrasound interpretation by student and registered podiatrists

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Foot and Ankle Research, July 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
11 Mendeley
Title
A comparison of the Doppler ultrasound interpretation by student and registered podiatrists
Published in
Journal of Foot and Ankle Research, July 2013
DOI 10.1186/1757-1146-6-25
Pubmed ID
Authors

Maria Young, Ivan Birch, Chloe Alexa Potter, Robert Saunders, Simon Otter, Shahin Hussain, Jane Pellett, Nadine Reynolds, Sarah Jenkin, Wendy Wright

Abstract

Hand held Doppler ultrasound machines are routinely used by podiatrists to assess the arterial perfusion of the lower limb. They are practical, painless and effective as a screening tool, and the available general evidence would suggest that interpretation by practitioners is reliable. This study compared the abilities of student and Health and Care Professions Council (HCPC) registered podiatrists to identify correctly Doppler ultrasound outputs.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 11 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 11 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 45%
Student > Postgraduate 2 18%
Student > Bachelor 1 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 9%
Other 1 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 7 64%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 27%
Unspecified 1 9%

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 04 December 2013.
All research outputs
#3,058,162
of 4,507,652 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Foot and Ankle Research
#235
of 284 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#79,447
of 122,076 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Foot and Ankle Research
#11
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 4,507,652 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 284 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% 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 122,076 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.