| Title |
Estimating the mean and variance from the median, range, and the size of a sample
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Research Methodology, April 2005
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2288-5-13 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Stela Pudar Hozo, Benjamin Djulbegovic, Iztok Hozo |
| Abstract |
Usually the researchers performing meta-analysis of continuous outcomes from clinical trials need their mean value and the variance (or standard deviation) in order to pool data. However, sometimes the published reports of clinical trials only report the median, range and the size of the trial. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 66 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 States | 10 | 15% |
| United Kingdom | 8 | 12% |
| Spain | 4 | 6% |
| France | 3 | 5% |
| Australia | 2 | 3% |
| Mexico | 1 | 2% |
| Thailand | 1 | 2% |
| Luxembourg | 1 | 2% |
| Bosnia and Herzegovina | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 11 | 17% |
| Unknown | 24 | 36% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 43 | 65% |
| Scientists | 22 | 33% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 2% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 1,997 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 13 | <1% |
| United States | 10 | <1% |
| Greece | 4 | <1% |
| Brazil | 4 | <1% |
| Italy | 3 | <1% |
| Spain | 3 | <1% |
| Germany | 3 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 2 | <1% |
| Malaysia | 2 | <1% |
| Other | 16 | <1% |
| Unknown | 1937 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 264 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 257 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 257 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 187 | 9% |
| Other | 139 | 7% |
| Other | 432 | 22% |
| Unknown | 461 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 721 | 36% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 119 | 6% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 81 | 4% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 58 | 3% |
| Engineering | 56 | 3% |
| Other | 354 | 18% |
| Unknown | 608 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 92. 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 23 March 2024.
All research outputs
#470,236
of 25,765,370 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#37
of 2,317 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#493
of 70,276 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#1
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,765,370 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 2,317 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 70,276 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them