↓ Skip to main content

Born to fail: flaws in replication design produce intended results

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medicine, March 2020
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
7 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
Born to fail: flaws in replication design produce intended results
Published in
BMC Medicine, March 2020
DOI 10.1186/s12916-020-01517-w
Pubmed ID
Authors

Abraham D. Flaxman, Riley Hazard, Ian Riley, Alan D. Lopez, Christopher J. L. Murray

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 7 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 7 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Lecturer 1 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 14%
Student > Master 1 14%
Student > Postgraduate 1 14%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 2 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 4 57%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 14%
Unknown 2 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 02 April 2020.
All research outputs
#15,603,636
of 23,199,478 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medicine
#3,106
of 3,493 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#228,538
of 368,608 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medicine
#70
of 79 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,199,478 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,493 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 43.7. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 368,608 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 79 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.