| Title |
Consolidated criteria for strengthening reporting of health research involving indigenous peoples: the CONSIDER statement
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Research Methodology, August 2019
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12874-019-0815-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Tania Huria, Suetonia C. Palmer, Suzanne Pitama, Lutz Beckert, Cameron Lacey, Shaun Ewen, Linda Tuhiwai Smith |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 74 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| New Zealand | 13 | 18% |
| Australia | 8 | 11% |
| United States | 6 | 8% |
| United Kingdom | 3 | 4% |
| Canada | 2 | 3% |
| Mexico | 1 | 1% |
| Pakistan | 1 | 1% |
| Curaçao | 1 | 1% |
| Comoros | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 37 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 40 | 54% |
| Scientists | 26 | 35% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 8 | 11% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 148 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 148 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 19 | 13% |
| Other | 13 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 13 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 6% |
| Other | 31 | 21% |
| Unknown | 51 | 34% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 28 | 19% |
| Social Sciences | 20 | 14% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 15 | 10% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 3% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 3 | 2% |
| Other | 22 | 15% |
| Unknown | 56 | 38% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 103. 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 05 April 2024.
All research outputs
#416,857
of 25,721,020 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#33
of 2,312 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#8,381
of 357,534 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#2
of 46 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,721,020 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 2,312 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.3. 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 357,534 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 46 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.