↓ Skip to main content

Bayes’ Rule for Clinicians: An Introduction

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, January 2010
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
twitter
14 X users
q&a
1 Q&A thread

Citations

dimensions_citation
47 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
131 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Bayes’ Rule for Clinicians: An Introduction
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, January 2010
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2010.00192
Pubmed ID
Authors

Chris F. Westbury

Abstract

Bayes' Rule is a way of calculating conditional probabilities. It is difficult to find an explanation of its relevance that is both mathematically comprehensive and easily accessible to all readers. This article tries to fill that void, by laying out the nature of Bayes' Rule and its implications for clinicians in a way that assumes little or no background in probability theory. It builds on Meehl and Rosen's (1955) classic paper, by laying out algebraic proofs that they simply allude to, and by providing extremely simple and intuitively accessible examples of the concepts that they assumed their reader understood.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 131 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 127 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 19 15%
Student > Bachelor 19 15%
Researcher 17 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 8%
Other 8 6%
Other 24 18%
Unknown 34 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 26 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 25 19%
Computer Science 6 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 3%
Other 28 21%
Unknown 37 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 30. 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 12 June 2023.
All research outputs
#1,204,292
of 23,852,694 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#2,477
of 31,989 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,112
of 169,091 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#11
of 69 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,852,694 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 31,989 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 169,091 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 69 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.