↓ Skip to main content

An assessment of the efficacy of searching in biomedical databases beyond MEDLINE in identifying studies for a systematic review on ward closures as an infection control intervention to control…

Overview of attention for article published in Systematic Reviews, November 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (69th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
17 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
32 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
An assessment of the efficacy of searching in biomedical databases beyond MEDLINE in identifying studies for a systematic review on ward closures as an infection control intervention to control outbreaks
Published in
Systematic Reviews, November 2014
DOI 10.1186/2046-4053-3-135
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yoojin Kwon, Susan E Powelson, Holly Wong, William A Ghali, John M Conly

Abstract

The purpose of our study is to determine the value and efficacy of searching biomedical databases beyond MEDLINE for systematic reviews.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 17 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

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 %
United Kingdom 1 3%
Unknown 31 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 12 38%
Librarian 8 25%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 13%
Student > Bachelor 2 6%
Researcher 2 6%
Other 3 9%
Unknown 1 3%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 44%
Social Sciences 4 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 13%
Computer Science 2 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 6%
Other 4 13%
Unknown 2 6%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 26 November 2014.
All research outputs
#1,802,653
of 14,535,614 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Reviews
#375
of 1,278 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#32,432
of 233,396 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Reviews
#31
of 103 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,535,614 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,278 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% 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 233,396 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 103 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.