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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Factors associated with online media attention to research: a cohort study of articles evaluating cancer treatments
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Research Integrity and Peer Review, July 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s41073-017-0033-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Romana Haneef, Philippe Ravaud, Gabriel Baron, Lina Ghosn, Isabelle Boutron |
| Abstract |
New metrics have been developed to assess the impact of research and provide an indication of online media attention and data dissemination. We aimed to describe online media attention of articles evaluating cancer treatments and identify the factors associated with high online media attention. We systematically searched MEDLINE via PubMed on March 1, 2015 for articles published during the first 6 months of 2014 in oncology and medical journals with a diverse range of impact factors, from 3.9 to 54.4, and selected a sample of articles evaluating a cancer treatment regardless of study design. Altmetric Explorer was used to identify online media attention of selected articles. The primary outcome was media attention an article received online as measured by Altmetric score (i.e., number of mentions in online news outlets, science blogs and social media). Regression analysis was performed to investigate the factors associated with high media attention, and regression coefficients represent the logarithm of ratio of mean (RoM) values of Altmetric score per unit change in the covariate. Among 792 articles, 218 (27.5%) received no online media attention (Altmetric score = 0). The median [Q1-Q3] Altmetric score was 2.0 [0.0-8.0], range 0.0-428.0. On multivariate analysis, factors associated with high Altmetric score were presence of a press release (RoM = 10.14, 95%CI [4.91-20.96]), open access to the article (RoM = 1.48, 95%CI [1.02-2.16]), and journal impact factor (RoM = 1.10, 95%CI [1.07-1.12]. As compared with observational studies, systematic reviews were not associated with high Altmetric score (RoM = 1.46, 95%CI [0.74-2.86];P = 0.27), nor were RCTs (RoM = 0.65, 95%CI [0.41-1.02];P = 0.059) and phase I/II non-RCTs (RoM = 0.58, 95%CI [0.33-1.05];P = 0.07). The articles with abstract conclusions favouring study treatments were not associated with high Altmetric score (RoM = 0.97, 95%CI [0.60-1.58];P = 0.91). Most important factors associated with high online media attention were the presence of a press release and the journal impact factor. There was no evidence that study design with high level of evidence and type of abstract conclusion were associated with high online media attention. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 81 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 12 | 15% |
| United States | 7 | 9% |
| France | 5 | 6% |
| Canada | 4 | 5% |
| Germany | 4 | 5% |
| Spain | 4 | 5% |
| Italy | 3 | 4% |
| Australia | 2 | 2% |
| Costa Rica | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 7 | 9% |
| Unknown | 32 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 56 | 69% |
| Scientists | 17 | 21% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 6 | 7% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 2% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 37 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 6 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 14% |
| Librarian | 3 | 8% |
| Researcher | 2 | 5% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 5 | 14% |
| Unknown | 14 | 38% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 22% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 5% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 3% |
| Mathematics | 1 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 3 | 8% |
| Unknown | 21 | 57% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 65. 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 25 October 2019.
All research outputs
#662,070
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from Research Integrity and Peer Review
#29
of 133 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#13,724
of 327,308 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Research Integrity and Peer Review
#2
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,584,565 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 133 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 76.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% 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 327,308 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 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 5 of them.