↓ Skip to main content

The Limitations of Evidence-Based Medicine--Applying Population-Based Recommendations to Individual Patients

Overview of attention for article published in The AMA Journal of Ethic, January 2011
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 (95th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
15 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Readers on

mendeley
78 Mendeley
citeulike
1 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
The Limitations of Evidence-Based Medicine--Applying Population-Based Recommendations to Individual Patients
Published in
The AMA Journal of Ethic, January 2011
DOI 10.1001/virtualmentor.2011.13.1.jdsc1-1101
Pubmed ID
Authors

Joshua J Goldman, Tiffany L Shih

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 78 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 3%
New Zealand 1 1%
Unknown 75 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 22 28%
Student > Master 7 9%
Other 5 6%
Student > Postgraduate 5 6%
Researcher 5 6%
Other 9 12%
Unknown 25 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 28 36%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 6%
Social Sciences 3 4%
Philosophy 2 3%
Other 5 6%
Unknown 26 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 25. 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 January 2024.
All research outputs
#1,613,177
of 26,461,995 outputs
Outputs from The AMA Journal of Ethic
#492
of 2,816 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#8,043
of 196,121 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The AMA Journal of Ethic
#6
of 25 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,461,995 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,816 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 22.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 196,121 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 25 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.