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 |
A systematic review of barriers and facilitators to participation in randomized controlled trials by Indigenous people from New Zealand, Australia, Canada and the United States
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Global Health Promotion, May 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1177/1757975914528961 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Marewa Glover, Anette Kira, Vanessa Johnston, Natalie Walker, David Thomas, Anne B. Chang, Chris Bullen, C. J. Segan, Ngiare Brown |
| Abstract |
Many randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are conducted each year but only a small proportion is specifically designed for Indigenous people. In this review we consider the challenges of participation in RCTs for Indigenous peoples from New Zealand, Australia, Canada and the United States and the opportunities for increasing participation. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 169 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| New Zealand | 1 | <1% |
| Peru | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 166 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 29 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 28 | 17% |
| Researcher | 25 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 15 | 9% |
| Professor | 6 | 4% |
| Other | 22 | 13% |
| Unknown | 44 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 44 | 26% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 21 | 12% |
| Social Sciences | 20 | 12% |
| Psychology | 15 | 9% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 3% |
| Other | 14 | 8% |
| Unknown | 50 | 30% |
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 30 November 2021.
All research outputs
#15,167,287
of 24,078,959 outputs
Outputs from Global Health Promotion
#528
of 790 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#123,484
of 231,291 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Global Health Promotion
#19
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,078,959 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 790 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% 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 231,291 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 29 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.