↓ Skip to main content

ROSES RepOrting standards for Systematic Evidence Syntheses: pro forma, flow-diagram and descriptive summary of the plan and conduct of environmental systematic reviews and systematic maps

Overview of attention for article published in Environmental Evidence, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#37 of 333)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (71st percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
53 X users
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
389 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
731 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
ROSES RepOrting standards for Systematic Evidence Syntheses: pro forma, flow-diagram and descriptive summary of the plan and conduct of environmental systematic reviews and systematic maps
Published in
Environmental Evidence, March 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13750-018-0121-7
Authors

Neal R. Haddaway, Biljana Macura, Paul Whaley, Andrew S. Pullin

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 53 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 731 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 731 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 127 17%
Student > Master 88 12%
Researcher 86 12%
Student > Bachelor 47 6%
Lecturer 37 5%
Other 94 13%
Unknown 252 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 81 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 78 11%
Social Sciences 73 10%
Business, Management and Accounting 31 4%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 29 4%
Other 171 23%
Unknown 268 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 35. 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 December 2023.
All research outputs
#1,177,951
of 26,017,215 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Evidence
#37
of 333 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#26,105
of 352,696 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Evidence
#2
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,017,215 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 333 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 352,696 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 5 of them.