| Title |
Developing a handheld record for patients with cystic fibrosis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Patient related outcome measures, August 2015
|
| DOI | 10.2147/prom.s86298 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Omendra Narayan, Siobhan Davies, Carly Tibbins, JH Martyn Rees, Warren Lenney, Francis J Gilchrist |
| Abstract |
Patient handheld records (PHHRs) promote self-management and empower the holder to take a more active role in the management of their disease. They have been used successfully in improving preventative care for children and have contributed to improved adherence in a number of chronic illnesses. Despite the potential advantages, there are no standard PHHRs for patients with cystic fibrosis (CF). We report the consultation process that led to the development of a CF PHHR, describe the final document, and analyze the feedback from their use at our center. We have made the CF PHHR freely available online. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 Kingdom | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 67% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 13 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 12 | 92% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 5 | 38% |
| Researcher | 4 | 31% |
| Professor | 1 | 8% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 8% |
| Other | 1 | 8% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 38% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 23% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 8% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 8% |
| Other | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 1 | 8% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 September 2015.
All research outputs
#16,063,069
of 25,394,764 outputs
Outputs from Patient related outcome measures
#93
of 197 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#146,313
of 276,518 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Patient related outcome measures
#3
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,394,764 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 197 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% 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 276,518 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.