↓ Skip to main content

Conducting a meta-ethnography of qualitative literature: Lessons learnt

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Research Methodology, April 2008
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (82nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
2 policy sources
twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
554 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
776 Mendeley
citeulike
3 CiteULike
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
Conducting a meta-ethnography of qualitative literature: Lessons learnt
Published in
BMC Medical Research Methodology, April 2008
DOI 10.1186/1471-2288-8-21
Pubmed ID
Authors

Salla Atkins, Simon Lewin, Helen Smith, Mark Engel, Atle Fretheim, Jimmy Volmink

Abstract

Qualitative synthesis has become more commonplace in recent years. Meta-ethnography is one of several methods for synthesising qualitative research and is being used increasingly within health care research. However, many aspects of the steps in the process remain ill-defined.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 776 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 16 2%
South Africa 2 <1%
Germany 2 <1%
Denmark 2 <1%
Netherlands 2 <1%
France 2 <1%
Italy 2 <1%
United States 2 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
Other 7 <1%
Unknown 738 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 169 22%
Student > Master 133 17%
Researcher 117 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 67 9%
Student > Bachelor 35 5%
Other 153 20%
Unknown 102 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 174 22%
Medicine and Dentistry 143 18%
Psychology 110 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 67 9%
Business, Management and Accounting 35 5%
Other 110 14%
Unknown 137 18%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 04 June 2021.
All research outputs
#3,508,482
of 19,539,469 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#620
of 1,766 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#45,258
of 275,574 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#19
of 125 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 19,539,469 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,766 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% 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 275,574 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 125 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.