| Title |
The Evidence Project risk of bias tool: assessing study rigor for both randomized and non-randomized intervention studies
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Systematic Reviews, January 2019
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13643-018-0925-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Caitlin E. Kennedy, Virginia A. Fonner, Kevin A. Armstrong, Julie A. Denison, Ping Teresa Yeh, Kevin R. O’Reilly, Michael D. Sweat |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 26 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 4 | 15% |
| United States | 3 | 12% |
| Canada | 3 | 12% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 8% |
| Denmark | 1 | 4% |
| Russia | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 12 | 46% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 14 | 54% |
| Scientists | 9 | 35% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 12% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 80 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 80 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 14 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 13 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 5% |
| Researcher | 4 | 5% |
| Unspecified | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 6 | 8% |
| Unknown | 36 | 45% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 18 | 23% |
| Psychology | 6 | 8% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 4% |
| Unspecified | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 11 | 14% |
| Unknown | 35 | 44% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 25. 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 29 July 2022.
All research outputs
#1,578,632
of 25,998,826 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Reviews
#232
of 2,251 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#35,891
of 452,754 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Reviews
#13
of 96 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,998,826 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 2,251 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 452,754 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 96 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.