↓ Skip to main content

Grey literature in meta-analyses of randomized trials of health care interventions

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2007
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
3 blogs
policy
1 policy source
twitter
7 tweeters
facebook
3 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
420 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
382 Mendeley
citeulike
4 CiteULike
connotea
1 Connotea
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
Grey literature in meta-analyses of randomized trials of health care interventions
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2007
DOI 10.1002/14651858.mr000010.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sally Hopewell, Steve McDonald, Mike J Clarke, Matthias Egger

Abstract

The inclusion of grey literature (i.e. literature that has not been formally published) in systematic reviews may help to overcome some of the problems of publication bias, which can arise due to the selective availability of data.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 382 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 9 2%
United Kingdom 6 2%
Netherlands 3 <1%
Canada 3 <1%
Ireland 2 <1%
Hong Kong 1 <1%
Austria 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Other 5 1%
Unknown 350 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 88 23%
Researcher 44 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 42 11%
Other 30 8%
Student > Bachelor 27 7%
Other 102 27%
Unknown 49 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 149 39%
Nursing and Health Professions 43 11%
Social Sciences 27 7%
Psychology 23 6%
Computer Science 13 3%
Other 58 15%
Unknown 69 18%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 34. 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 29 October 2020.
All research outputs
#821,619
of 19,243,709 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#1,986
of 11,950 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,551
of 165,367 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#9
of 101 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 19,243,709 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 11,950 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 27.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% 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 165,367 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 101 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.