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 |
ExaCT: automatic extraction of clinical trial characteristics from journal publications
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, September 2010
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1472-6947-10-56 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Svetlana Kiritchenko, Berry de Bruijn, Simona Carini, Joel Martin, Ida Sim |
| Abstract |
Clinical trials are one of the most important sources of evidence for guiding evidence-based practice and the design of new trials. However, most of this information is available only in free text - e.g., in journal publications - which is labour intensive to process for systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and other evidence synthesis studies. This paper presents an automatic information extraction system, called ExaCT, that assists users with locating and extracting key trial characteristics (e.g., eligibility criteria, sample size, drug dosage, primary outcomes) from full-text journal articles reporting on randomized controlled trials (RCTs). |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 19 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 | 7 | 37% |
| Australia | 2 | 11% |
| Canada | 1 | 5% |
| India | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 8 | 42% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 6 | 32% |
| Scientists | 6 | 32% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 5 | 26% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 11% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 158 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 4 | 3% |
| Australia | 2 | 1% |
| United States | 2 | 1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Taiwan | 1 | <1% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| Mexico | 1 | <1% |
| Croatia | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 145 | 92% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 33 | 21% |
| Researcher | 32 | 20% |
| Student > Master | 17 | 11% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 10 | 6% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 6% |
| Other | 33 | 21% |
| Unknown | 24 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Computer Science | 43 | 27% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 36 | 23% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 14 | 9% |
| Engineering | 7 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 3% |
| Other | 22 | 14% |
| Unknown | 31 | 20% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 21. 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 09 August 2023.
All research outputs
#1,749,777
of 25,307,332 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#84
of 2,138 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,987
of 105,120 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#1
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,307,332 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 2,138 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 105,120 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.