↓ Skip to main content

The quality of the evidence base for clinical pathway effectiveness: Room for improvement in the design of evaluation trials

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Research Methodology, June 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
59 Mendeley
Title
The quality of the evidence base for clinical pathway effectiveness: Room for improvement in the design of evaluation trials
Published in
BMC Medical Research Methodology, June 2012
DOI 10.1186/1471-2288-12-80
Pubmed ID
Authors

Thomas Rotter, Leigh Kinsman, Erica James, Andreas Machotta, Ewout W Steyerberg

Abstract

The purpose of this article is to report on the quality of the existing evidence base regarding the effectiveness of clinical pathway (CPW) research in the hospital setting. The analysis is based on a recently published Cochrane review of the effectiveness of CPWs.

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 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 3%
Indonesia 1 2%
Colombia 1 2%
United States 1 2%
Unknown 54 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 12 20%
Researcher 12 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 12%
Other 6 10%
Student > Postgraduate 4 7%
Other 12 20%
Unknown 6 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 27 46%
Computer Science 6 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 8%
Neuroscience 3 5%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 3 5%
Other 7 12%
Unknown 8 14%

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 05 July 2012.
All research outputs
#10,995,466
of 12,373,180 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#1,009
of 1,095 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#103,693
of 120,608 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#15
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,373,180 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,095 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.5. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 120,608 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 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.