↓ Skip to main content

Handsearching versus electronic searching to identify reports of randomized trials

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2007
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 (92nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
policy
2 policy sources
twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
122 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
121 Mendeley
citeulike
8 CiteULike
connotea
1 Connotea
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
Handsearching versus electronic searching to identify reports of randomized trials
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2007
DOI 10.1002/14651858.mr000001.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sally Hopewell, Mike J Clarke, Carol Lefebvre, Roberta W Scherer

Abstract

Systematic reviewers need to decide how best to reduce bias in identifying studies for their review. Even when journals are indexed in electronic databases, it can still be difficult to identify all relevant studies reported in these journals. Over 1700 journals have been or are being handsearched within The Cochrane Collaboration to identify reports of controlled trials in order to help address these problems.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 121 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 5 4%
Canada 5 4%
United States 3 2%
Spain 3 2%
Mexico 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Other 3 2%
Unknown 97 80%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 27 22%
Librarian 24 20%
Researcher 20 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 14%
Student > Bachelor 8 7%
Other 25 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 68 56%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 8%
Social Sciences 9 7%
Psychology 8 7%
Unspecified 8 7%
Other 18 15%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 19 November 2018.
All research outputs
#1,006,542
of 12,961,283 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#3,176
of 10,417 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#7,498
of 96,456 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#21
of 71 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,961,283 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,417 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% 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 96,456 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 71 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 70% of its contemporaries.