↓ Skip to main content

Tutorial for writing systematic reviews for the Brazilian Journal of Physical Therapy (BJPT)

Overview of attention for article published in Fisioterapia : organo de la Asociacion Espanola de Fisioterapia., December 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
34 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
150 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Tutorial for writing systematic reviews for the Brazilian Journal of Physical Therapy (BJPT)
Published in
Fisioterapia : organo de la Asociacion Espanola de Fisioterapia., December 2014
DOI 10.1590/bjpt-rbf.2014.0077
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marisa C Mancini, Jefferson R Cardoso, Rosana F Sampaio, Lucíola C M Costa, Cristina M N Cabral, Leonardo O P Costa

Abstract

Systematic reviews aim to summarize all evidence using very rigorous methods in order to address a specific research question with less bias as possible. Systematic reviews are widely used in the field of physical therapy, however not all reviews have good quality. This tutorial aims to guide authors of the Brazilian Journal of Physical Therapy on how systematic reviews should be conducted and reported in order to be accepted for publication. It is expected that this tutorial will help authors of systematic reviews as well as journal editors and reviewers on how to conduct, report, critically appraise and interpret this type of study design.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 150 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 4 3%
Unknown 146 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 36 24%
Student > Bachelor 24 16%
Professor 14 9%
Student > Postgraduate 11 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 5%
Other 26 17%
Unknown 31 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 33 22%
Nursing and Health Professions 28 19%
Sports and Recreations 10 7%
Neuroscience 7 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 4%
Other 20 13%
Unknown 46 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 April 2015.
All research outputs
#17,007,607
of 25,774,185 outputs
Outputs from Fisioterapia : organo de la Asociacion Espanola de Fisioterapia.
#520
of 893 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#219,249
of 371,411 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Fisioterapia : organo de la Asociacion Espanola de Fisioterapia.
#7
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,774,185 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 893 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.8. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 371,411 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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 2 of them.