↓ Skip to main content

Randomised placebo-controlled trials of individualised homeopathic treatment: systematic review and meta-analysis

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

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#4 of 1,457)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets
blogs
8 blogs
twitter
371 tweeters
facebook
73 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
96 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
160 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
Randomised placebo-controlled trials of individualised homeopathic treatment: systematic review and meta-analysis
Published in
Systematic Reviews, December 2014
DOI 10.1186/2046-4053-3-142
Pubmed ID
Authors

Robert T Mathie, Suzanne M Lloyd, Lynn A Legg, Jürgen Clausen, Sian Moss, Jonathan RT Davidson, Ian Ford

Abstract

A rigorous and focused systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of individualised homeopathic treatment has not previously been undertaken. We tested the hypothesis that the outcome of an individualised homeopathic treatment approach using homeopathic medicines is distinguishable from that of placebos.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 371 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 160 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 3 2%
Italy 2 1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
Unknown 152 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 39 24%
Researcher 24 15%
Student > Master 22 14%
Other 17 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 13 8%
Other 33 21%
Unknown 12 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 60 38%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 21 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 20 13%
Psychology 8 5%
Social Sciences 5 3%
Other 24 15%
Unknown 22 14%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 369. 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 October 2020.
All research outputs
#42,113
of 16,277,204 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Reviews
#4
of 1,457 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#611
of 309,373 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Reviews
#1
of 108 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 16,277,204 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,457 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 309,373 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 108 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.