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 |
Title and Abstract Screening and Evaluation in Systematic Reviews (TASER): a pilot randomised controlled trial of title and abstract screening by medical students
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Systematic Reviews, October 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/2046-4053-3-121 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Lauren Ng, Veronica Pitt, Kit Huckvale, Ornella Clavisi, Tari Turner, Russell Gruen, Julian H Elliott |
| Abstract |
The production of high quality systematic reviews requires rigorous methods that are time-consuming and resource intensive. Citation screening is a key step in the systematic review process. An opportunity to improve the efficiency of systematic review production involves the use of non-expert groups and new technologies for citation screening. We performed a pilot study of citation screening by medical students using four screening methods and compared students' performance to experienced review authors. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 States | 1 | 25% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 94 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Sweden | 1 | 1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
| Canada | 1 | 1% |
| Romania | 1 | 1% |
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 89 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 18 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 14 | 15% |
| Librarian | 9 | 10% |
| Researcher | 7 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 7% |
| Other | 24 | 26% |
| Unknown | 15 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 20 | 21% |
| Social Sciences | 12 | 13% |
| Psychology | 11 | 12% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 8 | 9% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 6% |
| Other | 17 | 18% |
| Unknown | 20 | 21% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 06 April 2018.
All research outputs
#13,182,017
of 22,768,097 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Reviews
#1,389
of 1,992 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#121,077
of 259,774 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Reviews
#25
of 37 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,768,097 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,992 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.7. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% 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 259,774 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 37 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.