| Title |
Clarifying differences between review designs and methods
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Systematic Reviews, June 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/2046-4053-1-28 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
David Gough, James Thomas, Sandy Oliver |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 64 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 | 20 | 31% |
| South Africa | 3 | 5% |
| Canada | 3 | 5% |
| Chile | 3 | 5% |
| Spain | 2 | 3% |
| Australia | 2 | 3% |
| Saudi Arabia | 1 | 2% |
| Ecuador | 1 | 2% |
| United States | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 8 | 13% |
| Unknown | 20 | 31% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 42 | 66% |
| Scientists | 13 | 20% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 5 | 8% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 3 | 5% |
| Unknown | 1 | 2% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 1,411 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 13 | <1% |
| Canada | 9 | <1% |
| United States | 7 | <1% |
| Germany | 3 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 2 | <1% |
| Portugal | 2 | <1% |
| Sweden | 2 | <1% |
| Australia | 2 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 9 | <1% |
| Unknown | 1361 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 234 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 229 | 16% |
| Researcher | 163 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 114 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 68 | 5% |
| Other | 306 | 22% |
| Unknown | 297 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 237 | 17% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 218 | 15% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 112 | 8% |
| Psychology | 100 | 7% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 92 | 7% |
| Other | 310 | 22% |
| Unknown | 342 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 75. 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 14 December 2022.
All research outputs
#583,129
of 25,732,188 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Reviews
#69
of 2,249 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,774
of 181,230 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Reviews
#1
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,732,188 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,249 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 particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 181,230 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them