↓ Skip to main content

Using alternative statistical formats for presenting risks and risk reductions

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, March 2011
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 (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
2 blogs
policy
1 policy source
twitter
44 tweeters
peer_reviews
1 peer review site
facebook
2 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page
googleplus
1 Google+ user
linkedin
1 LinkedIn user

Citations

dimensions_citation
140 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
216 Mendeley
citeulike
3 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
Using alternative statistical formats for presenting risks and risk reductions
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, March 2011
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd006776.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Elie A Akl, Andrew D Oxman, Jeph Herrin, Gunn E Vist, Irene Terrenato, Francesca Sperati, Cecilia Costiniuk, Diana Blank, Holger Schünemann

Abstract

The success of evidence-based practice depends on the clear and effective communication of statistical information.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 44 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 216 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 4 2%
Canada 3 1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Norway 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Unknown 204 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 45 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 30 14%
Student > Master 29 13%
Other 23 11%
Unspecified 20 9%
Other 69 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 92 43%
Unspecified 37 17%
Psychology 27 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 6%
Social Sciences 12 6%
Other 36 17%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 57. 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 10 May 2019.
All research outputs
#298,396
of 13,391,475 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#798
of 10,580 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,067
of 121,246 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#4
of 105 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,391,475 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,580 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 121,246 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 105 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.