| Title |
Good practices for the translation, cultural adaptation, and linguistic validation of clinician-reported outcome, observer-reported outcome, and performance outcome measures
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes, November 2020
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s41687-020-00248-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Shawn McKown, Catherine Acquadro, Caroline Anfray, Benjamin Arnold, Sonya Eremenco, Christelle Giroudet, Mona Martin, Dana Weiss |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 4 | 80% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 40% |
| Members of the public | 2 | 40% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 76 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 76 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 12 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 7% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 12 | 16% |
| Unknown | 28 | 37% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 19 | 25% |
| Psychology | 8 | 11% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 9% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 3% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 8 | 11% |
| Unknown | 30 | 39% |
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 27 November 2020.
All research outputs
#7,577,721
of 23,257,423 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes
#155
of 515 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#164,706
of 420,818 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes
#8
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,257,423 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 515 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% 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 420,818 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 60% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 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 70% of its contemporaries.