| Title |
Evidence synthesis as the key to more coherent and efficient research
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Research Methodology, April 2009
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2288-9-29 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Alexander J Sutton, Nicola J Cooper, David R Jones |
| Abstract |
Systematic review and meta-analysis currently underpin much of evidence-based medicine. Such methodologies bring order to previous research, but future research planning remains relatively incoherent and inefficient. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 94 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 3 | 3% |
| Australia | 2 | 2% |
| France | 1 | 1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 1% |
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 86 | 91% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 21 | 22% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 13 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 10 | 11% |
| Professor | 9 | 10% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 6 | 6% |
| Other | 17 | 18% |
| Unknown | 18 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 37 | 39% |
| Mathematics | 10 | 11% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 5% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 5% |
| Psychology | 5 | 5% |
| Other | 11 | 12% |
| Unknown | 21 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 17 October 2014.
All research outputs
#18,380,628
of 22,766,595 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#1,734
of 2,010 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#84,780
of 92,328 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#7
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,766,595 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,010 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% 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 92,328 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.