| Title |
A Web-based archive of systematic review data
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Systematic Reviews, February 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/2046-4053-1-15 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Stanley Ip, Nira Hadar, Sarah Keefe, Christopher Parkin, Ramon Iovin, Ethan M Balk, Joseph Lau |
| Abstract |
Systematic reviews have become increasingly critical to informing healthcare policy; however, they remain a time-consuming and labor-intensive activity. The extraction of data from constituent studies comprises a significant portion of this effort, an activity which is often needlessly duplicated, such as when attempting to update a previously conducted review or in reviews of overlapping topics.In order to address these inefficiencies, and to improve the speed and quality of healthcare policy- and decision-making, we have initiated the development of the Systematic Review Data Repository, an open collaborative Web-based repository of systematic review data. As envisioned, this resource would serve as both a central archive and data extraction tool, shared among and freely accessible to organizations producing systematic reviews worldwide. A suite of easy-to-use software tools with a Web frontend would enable researchers to seamlessly search for and incorporate previously deposited data into their own reviews, as well as contribute their own.In developing this resource, we identified a number of technical and non-technical challenges, as well as devised a number of potential solutions, including proposals for systems and software tools to assure data quality, stratify and control user access effectively and flexibly accommodate all manner of study data, as well as means by which to govern and foster adoption of this new resource.Herein we provide an account of the rationale and development of the Systematic Review Data Repository thus far, as well as outline its future trajectory. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 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 Kingdom | 5 | 33% |
| Spain | 2 | 13% |
| United States | 1 | 7% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 7% |
| Denmark | 1 | 7% |
| Canada | 1 | 7% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 3 | 20% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 11 | 73% |
| Scientists | 2 | 13% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 13% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 73 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 3% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
| Canada | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 69 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 17 | 23% |
| Student > Master | 10 | 14% |
| Librarian | 9 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 8% |
| Professor | 6 | 8% |
| Other | 18 | 25% |
| Unknown | 7 | 10% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 27 | 37% |
| Social Sciences | 8 | 11% |
| Computer Science | 6 | 8% |
| Psychology | 6 | 8% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 8 | 11% |
| Unknown | 14 | 19% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 July 2012.
All research outputs
#4,186,421
of 25,654,806 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Reviews
#745
of 2,244 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#25,705
of 169,613 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Reviews
#7
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,654,806 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,244 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 gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% 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 169,613 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 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.