↓ Skip to main content

Risk of bias judgments for random sequence generation in Cochrane systematic reviews were frequently not in line with Cochrane Handbook

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Research Methodology, August 2019
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (68th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
9 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
Risk of bias judgments for random sequence generation in Cochrane systematic reviews were frequently not in line with Cochrane Handbook
Published in
BMC Medical Research Methodology, August 2019
DOI 10.1186/s12874-019-0804-y
Authors

Ognjen Barcot, Matija Boric, Tina Poklepovic Pericic, Marija Cavar, Svjetlana Dosenovic, Ivana Vuka, Livia Puljak

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 9 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 9 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 3 33%
Other 2 22%
Lecturer 1 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 11%
Student > Master 1 11%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 1 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 4 44%
Computer Science 1 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 11%
Sports and Recreations 1 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 11%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 1 11%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 08 August 2019.
All research outputs
#3,506,653
of 14,235,868 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#535
of 1,308 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#80,025
of 254,065 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,235,868 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,308 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% 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 254,065 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 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them