| Title |
Positive predictive values of the coding for bisphosphonate therapy among cancer patients in the Danish National Patient Registry
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Epidemiology, August 2012
|
| DOI | 10.2147/clep.s32868 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Malene Schou Nielsson, Rune Erichsen, Trine Frøslev, Aliki Taylor, John Acquavella, Vera Ehrenstein |
| Abstract |
The purpose of this study was to estimate the positive predictive value (PPV) of the coding for bisphosphonate treatment in selected cancer patients from the Danish National Patient Registry (DNPR). |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Taiwan | 1 | 5% |
| Canada | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 18 | 90% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 25% |
| Researcher | 4 | 20% |
| Other | 2 | 10% |
| Professor | 1 | 5% |
| Lecturer > Senior Lecturer | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 2 | 10% |
| Unknown | 5 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 50% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 5% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 5% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 1 | 5% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 6 | 30% |
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 11 September 2012.
All research outputs
#16,188,873
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Epidemiology
#470
of 780 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#109,745
of 179,468 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Epidemiology
#7
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,584,565 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 780 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.7. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% 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 179,468 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.