↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

The Oxford Participation and Activities Questionnaire: study protocol

Overview of attention for article published in Patient related outcome measures, December 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
25 Mendeley
Title
The Oxford Participation and Activities Questionnaire: study protocol
Published in
Patient related outcome measures, December 2013
DOI 10.2147/prom.s53762
Pubmed ID
Authors

David Morley, Sarah Dummett, Laura Kelly, Jill Dawson, Ray Fitzpatrick, Crispin Jenkinson

Abstract

With an ageing population and increasing demands on health and social care services, there is growing importance attached to the management of long-term conditions, including maximizing the cost-effectiveness of treatments. In line with this, there is increasing emphasis on the need to keep people both active and participating in daily life. Consequently, it is essential that well developed and validated instruments that can meaningfully assess levels of participation and activity are widely available. Current measures, however, are largely focused on disability and rehabilitation, and there is no measure of activity or participation for generic use that fully meets the standards set by regulatory bodies such as the US Food and Drug Administration. Here we detail a protocol for the development and validation of a new patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) for assessment of participation and activity in people experiencing a variety of health conditions, ie, the Oxford Participation and Activities Questionnaire (Ox-PAQ). The stages incorporated in its development are entirely in line with current regulations and represent best practice in the development of PROMs.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 25 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 4%
United States 1 4%
Unknown 23 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 28%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 16%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 8%
Other 1 4%
Student > Bachelor 1 4%
Other 4 16%
Unknown 6 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 36%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 8%
Social Sciences 2 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 8%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 4%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 7 28%
Attention Score in Context

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 11 December 2013.
All research outputs
#20,817,194
of 25,576,801 outputs
Outputs from Patient related outcome measures
#144
of 186 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#246,704
of 321,922 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Patient related outcome measures
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,576,801 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 186 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.0. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% 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 321,922 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them