| Title |
Healthcare outcomes assessed with observational study designs compared with those assessed in randomized trials: a meta‐epidemiological study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2024
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.mr000034.pub3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ingrid Toews, Andrew Anglemyer, John Lz Nyirenda, Dima Alsaid, Sara Balduzzi, Kathrin Grummich, Lukas Schwingshackl, Lisa Bero |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 93 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 11 | 12% |
| United Kingdom | 7 | 8% |
| Australia | 4 | 4% |
| Canada | 3 | 3% |
| Sweden | 3 | 3% |
| United States | 2 | 2% |
| Germany | 2 | 2% |
| Spain | 1 | 1% |
| Mexico | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 8 | 9% |
| Unknown | 51 | 55% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 76 | 82% |
| Scientists | 11 | 12% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 5 | 5% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 1% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 56 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 15 | 26% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 14% |
| Researcher | 7 | 12% |
| Other | 3 | 5% |
| Professor | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 11 | 19% |
| Unknown | 10 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 22 | 39% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 9% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 4% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 9 | 16% |
| Unknown | 15 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 53. 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 20 April 2024.
All research outputs
#815,247
of 25,820,938 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#1,468
of 13,131 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12,876
of 357,215 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#6
of 84 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,820,938 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,131 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 357,215 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 84 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 92% of its contemporaries.