↓ Skip to main content

Validity of Qualis database as a predictor of evidence hierarchy and risk of bias in randomized controlled trials: a case study in dentistry

Overview of attention for article published in Clinics, January 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
19 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
Validity of Qualis database as a predictor of evidence hierarchy and risk of bias in randomized controlled trials: a case study in dentistry
Published in
Clinics, January 2011
DOI 10.1590/s1807-59322011000200025
Authors

Christiane Alves Ferreira, Carlos Alfredo Salles Loureiro, Humberto Saconato, Alvaro Atallah

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 19 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 19 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 26%
Student > Bachelor 5 26%
Student > Postgraduate 2 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 5%
Lecturer 1 5%
Other 4 21%
Unknown 1 5%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 42%
Computer Science 2 11%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 11%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 5%
Other 3 16%
Unknown 2 11%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 10 June 2013.
All research outputs
#2,471,811
of 4,655,155 outputs
Outputs from Clinics
#59
of 115 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#45,236
of 90,564 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinics
#2
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 4,655,155 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 115 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% 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 90,564 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.