↓ Skip to main content

Michigan Publishing

Article Metrics

National Institutes of Health Pathways to Prevention Workshop: Advancing the Research on Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome

Overview of attention for article published in Annals of Internal Medicine, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
blogs
3 blogs
policy
1 policy source
twitter
84 tweeters
facebook
25 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
28 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
49 Mendeley
Title
National Institutes of Health Pathways to Prevention Workshop: Advancing the Research on Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome
Published in
Annals of Internal Medicine, June 2015
DOI 10.7326/m15-0338
Pubmed ID
Authors

Carmen R. Green, Penney Cowan, Ronit Elk, Kathleen M. O'Neil, Angela L. Rasmussen

Abstract

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) Pathways to Prevention Workshop: Advancing the Research on Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome was cosponsored by the NIH Office of Disease Prevention and the Trans-NIH Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome Research Working Group. A multidisciplinary working group developed the agenda, and an Evidence-based Practice Center prepared an evidence report through a contract with the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality to facilitate the discussion. During the 1.5-day workshop, invited experts discussed the body of evidence and attendees had the opportunity to comment during open discussions. After weighing evidence from the evidence report, expert presentations, and public comments, an unbiased, independent panel prepared a draft report that identified research gaps and future research priorities. The report was posted on the NIH Office of Disease Prevention Web site for 4 weeks for public comment.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 84 tweeters 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 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 2%
United Kingdom 1 2%
Unknown 47 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 22%
Student > Master 8 16%
Unspecified 6 12%
Researcher 5 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 8%
Other 15 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 20%
Unspecified 7 14%
Psychology 7 14%
Neuroscience 5 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 10%
Other 15 31%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 107. 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 20 February 2019.
All research outputs
#127,996
of 12,537,999 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Internal Medicine
#644
of 10,277 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,914
of 234,331 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Internal Medicine
#20
of 128 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,537,999 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,277 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 31.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 234,331 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 128 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.