↓ Skip to main content

How effects on health equity are assessed in systematic reviews of interventions

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2010
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 (90th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
15 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
45 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
159 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
How effects on health equity are assessed in systematic reviews of interventions
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2010
DOI 10.1002/14651858.mr000028.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Vivian Welch, Peter Tugwell, Mark Petticrew, Joanne de Montigny, Erin Ueffing, Betsy Kristjansson, Jessie McGowan, Maria Benkhalti Jandu, George A Wells, Kevin Brand, Janet Smylie

Abstract

Enhancing health equity has now achieved international political importance with endorsement from the World Health Assembly in 2009.  The failure of systematic reviews to consider effects on health equity is cited by decision-makers as a limitation to their ability to inform policy and program decisions. 

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 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 159 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Colombia 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 152 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 32 20%
Researcher 27 17%
Student > Bachelor 17 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 8%
Other 27 17%
Unknown 27 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 50 31%
Social Sciences 26 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 22 14%
Psychology 11 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 2%
Other 14 9%
Unknown 33 21%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 01 January 2018.
All research outputs
#1,140,924
of 12,913,761 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#3,554
of 10,451 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#23,073
of 245,512 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#44
of 117 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,913,761 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,451 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% 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 245,512 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 117 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its contemporaries.