| Title |
Risk of bias assessment of sequence generation: a study of 100 systematic reviews of trials
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Systematic Reviews, January 2019
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13643-018-0924-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Francesca Wuytack, Maria Regan, Linda Biesty, Pauline Meskell, Jennifer E. Lutomski, Martin O’Donnell, Shaun Treweek, Declan Devane |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 18 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Ireland | 7 | 39% |
| United States | 3 | 17% |
| United Kingdom | 3 | 17% |
| Israel | 1 | 6% |
| Mexico | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 3 | 17% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 11 | 61% |
| Scientists | 5 | 28% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 11% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 12 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 12 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 3 | 25% |
| Librarian | 2 | 17% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 1 | 8% |
| Other | 1 | 8% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 3 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 25% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 17% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 8% |
| Neuroscience | 1 | 8% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 4 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. 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 May 2019.
All research outputs
#2,253,237
of 25,595,500 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Reviews
#363
of 2,242 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#51,015
of 448,035 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Reviews
#23
of 95 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,595,500 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,242 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 83% 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 448,035 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 95 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.