Report for: The PACE trial: It’s time to broaden perceptions and move on

Title	The PACE trial: It’s time to broaden perceptions and move on
Published in	Journal of Health Psychology, April 2017
DOI	10.1177/1359105317703789
Pubmed ID	28805523
Authors	Keith J Petrie, John Weinman
Abstract	The continued critiques of the PACE trial highlight how differing beliefs about the causes of chronic fatigue syndrome still influence how scientific studies in this area are accepted and evaluated. Causal beliefs about chronic fatigue syndrome and a modern version of Cartesian dualism are important in understanding the reaction to the PACE trial. The continued debate on the PACE trial seems to miss the fact that science is incremental. An unfortunate outcome of the PACE controversy and intimidation of researchers may be less research in the area. It is time to move on from criticism and collect more data on effective treatments.

View on publisher site Alert me about new mentions

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 75 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Geographical breakdown

Country	Count	As %
United Kingdom	30	40%
United States	5	7%
Australia	3	4%
New Zealand	2	3%
Norway	1	1%
France	1	1%
Ireland	1	1%
Bosnia and Herzegovina	1	1%
Netherlands	1	1%
Other	4	5%
Unknown	26	35%

Demographic breakdown

Type	Count	As %
Members of the public	63	84%
Scientists	7	9%
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals)	3	4%
Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors)	2	3%

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 27 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country	Count	As %
Unknown	27	100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status	Count	As %
Professor > Associate Professor	4	15%
Student > Postgraduate	3	11%
Student > Master	3	11%
Student > Doctoral Student	2	7%
Student > Bachelor	2	7%
Other	4	15%
Unknown	9	33%

Readers by discipline	Count	As %
Nursing and Health Professions	5	19%
Social Sciences	4	15%
Psychology	3	11%
Medicine and Dentistry	3	11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology	1	4%
Other	1	4%
Unknown	10	37%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 64. 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 09 October 2017.

All research outputs

#543,507

of 22,324,089 outputs

Outputs from Journal of Health Psychology

#91

of 2,077 outputs

Outputs of similar age

#12,505

of 286,127 outputs

Outputs of similar age from Journal of Health Psychology

of 51 outputs

Altmetric has tracked 22,324,089 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.

So far Altmetric has tracked 2,077 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 286,127 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 95% of its contemporaries.

We're also able to compare this research output to 51 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.

SAGE Publishing

Article Metrics

The PACE trial: It’s time to broaden perceptions and move on

About this Attention Score

Mentioned by

Citations

Readers on

Twitter Demographics

Geographical breakdown

Demographic breakdown

Mendeley readers

Geographical breakdown

Demographic breakdown

Attention Score in Context