↓ Skip to main content

Four Best Practices for Meta-Analysis: A Systematic Review of Methodological Rigor in Mathematics Interventions for Students With or at Risk of Disabilities

Overview of attention for article published in Learning Disability Quarterly, July 2023
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#31 of 196)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users

Readers on

mendeley
2 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
Four Best Practices for Meta-Analysis: A Systematic Review of Methodological Rigor in Mathematics Interventions for Students With or at Risk of Disabilities
Published in
Learning Disability Quarterly, July 2023
DOI 10.1177/07319487231185133
Authors

Soyoung Park, Young Ri Lee, Gena Nelson, Elizabeth Tipton

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 12 August 2023.
All research outputs
#6,115,772
of 24,417,958 outputs
Outputs from Learning Disability Quarterly
#31
of 196 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#78,597
of 305,566 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Learning Disability Quarterly
#3
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,417,958 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 196 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 305,566 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.