| Title |
Randomisation to protect against selection bias in healthcare trials
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.mr000012.pub3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jan Odgaard‐Jensen, Gunn E Vist, Antje Timmer, Regina Kunz, Elie A Akl, Holger Schünemann, Matthias Briel, Alain J Nordmann, Silvia Pregno, Andrew D Oxman |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 3 | 43% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 29% |
| Australia | 1 | 14% |
| Unknown | 1 | 14% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 6 | 86% |
| Scientists | 1 | 14% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 348 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 4 | 1% |
| United States | 2 | <1% |
| Ireland | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Sweden | 1 | <1% |
| Peru | 1 | <1% |
| New Zealand | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 337 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 71 | 20% |
| Student > Bachelor | 46 | 13% |
| Researcher | 41 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 37 | 11% |
| Other | 20 | 6% |
| Other | 75 | 22% |
| Unknown | 58 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 130 | 37% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 40 | 11% |
| Psychology | 16 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 11 | 3% |
| Social Sciences | 11 | 3% |
| Other | 59 | 17% |
| Unknown | 81 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 37. 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 30 November 2021.
All research outputs
#1,123,211
of 25,806,080 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#2,266
of 13,140 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,244
of 121,375 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#5
of 100 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,806,080 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,140 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 121,375 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 100 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.