↓ Skip to main content

What is a pilot or feasibility study? A review of current practice and editorial policy

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Research Methodology, July 2010
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
twitter
26 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
474 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
1122 Mendeley
citeulike
6 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
What is a pilot or feasibility study? A review of current practice and editorial policy
Published in
BMC Medical Research Methodology, July 2010
DOI 10.1186/1471-2288-10-67
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mubashir Arain, Michael J Campbell, Cindy L Cooper, Gillian A Lancaster

Abstract

In 2004, a review of pilot studies published in seven major medical journals during 2000-01 recommended that the statistical analysis of such studies should be either mainly descriptive or focus on sample size estimation, while results from hypothesis testing must be interpreted with caution. We revisited these journals to see whether the subsequent recommendations have changed the practice of reporting pilot studies. We also conducted a survey to identify the methodological components in registered research studies which are described as 'pilot' or 'feasibility' studies. We extended this survey to grant-awarding bodies and editors of medical journals to discover their policies regarding the function and reporting of pilot studies.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 26 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 1,122 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 22 2%
United States 12 1%
Malaysia 6 <1%
Canada 5 <1%
Portugal 3 <1%
Brazil 2 <1%
South Africa 2 <1%
Japan 2 <1%
Australia 2 <1%
Other 20 2%
Unknown 1046 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 254 23%
Student > Master 193 17%
Researcher 175 16%
Student > Bachelor 118 11%
Unspecified 63 6%
Other 319 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 308 27%
Psychology 176 16%
Unspecified 133 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 114 10%
Social Sciences 111 10%
Other 280 25%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 29. 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 05 March 2019.
All research outputs
#565,184
of 13,454,351 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#73
of 1,247 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,212
of 121,002 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,454,351 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 1,247 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 121,002 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 96% 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