↓ Skip to main content

Short-term impact of celebrating the international clinical trial day: experience from Ethiopia

Overview of attention for article published in Trials, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
32 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
Short-term impact of celebrating the international clinical trial day: experience from Ethiopia
Published in
Trials, July 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13063-017-2081-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Abebaw Fekadu, Asrat Hailu, Eyasu Makonnen, Anteneh Belete, Getnet Yimer

Abstract

Just over 2 years ago on 20 May 2014, we celebrated the first International Clinical Trial Day (ICTD) in Ethiopia at the College of Health Sciences, Addis Ababa University. The main aim of the celebration was to express solidarity with clinical researchers, particularly clinical trialists, across the world. Since this first celebration, several major steps have been taken with potential for improving the conduct of clinical trials in our institution and more broadly within the country. These have included policy impact, particularly commitment from the government and the institution for supporting clinical trials and for the broader improvement of access to medicines. A Clinical Trial Unit, led by a multi-disciplinary team of researchers, has been established. A regional centre of excellence is being established to build regional capacity for translational research and clinical trials. These are important outputs attributable to the celebration of the ICTD. We encourage ICTD celebration at institutions conducting clinical research. This is likely to have unanticipated positive institutional, national and even regional consequences.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 32 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 7 22%
Student > Postgraduate 4 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 13%
Researcher 3 9%
Student > Bachelor 3 9%
Other 4 13%
Unknown 7 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 7 22%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 13%
Social Sciences 3 9%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 6%
Other 7 22%
Unknown 6 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 August 2017.
All research outputs
#16,462,378
of 25,988,468 outputs
Outputs from Trials
#1,152
of 1,868 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#178,901
of 312,347 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Trials
#2
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,988,468 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,868 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 312,347 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.