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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Cochrane plain language summaries are highly heterogeneous with low adherence to the standards
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Research Methodology, May 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12874-016-0162-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Antonia Jelicic Kadic, Mahir Fidahic, Milan Vujcic, Frano Saric, Ivana Propadalo, Ivana Marelja, Svjetlana Dosenovic, Livia Puljak |
| Abstract |
The aim of this study was to analyze whether Cochrane plain language summaries (PLSs) adhere to the Standards for the reporting of Plain Language Summaries in new Cochrane Intervention Reviews (PLEACS). A systematic analysis of adherence to the measurable PLEACS items was performed for Cochrane PLSs published from March 2013 to the end of January 2015. Duplicate independent data extraction was performed. An adherence score was calculated for each PLS and for the Cochrane Review Groups (CRGs) that published them. Of the 1738 analyzed PLSs, not a single one adhered fully to the measured PLEACS items. The highest adherence was found for absence of details of the search strategy (99 % adherence), and the lowest adherence for an item mandating to address quality according to the GRADE system (0.7 % adherence). Overall adherence percentage of PLSs reporting reviews with included studies was 57 %. Different CRGs had a wide range of adherence scores. Cochrane plain language summaries are highly heterogeneous with a low adherence to the PLEACS standards. Therefore, there is much room for improving the content and consistency of the PLS. A standardization of PLSs is necessary to ensure delivery of proper and consistent information for consumers. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 23 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 8 | 35% |
| Canada | 2 | 9% |
| Australia | 1 | 4% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 4% |
| Denmark | 1 | 4% |
| United States | 1 | 4% |
| New Zealand | 1 | 4% |
| Germany | 1 | 4% |
| Spain | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 6 | 26% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 14 | 61% |
| Scientists | 4 | 17% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 3 | 13% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 9% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 17 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 17 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 29% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 18% |
| Researcher | 2 | 12% |
| Other | 2 | 12% |
| Librarian | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 2 | 12% |
| Unknown | 2 | 12% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 35% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 18% |
| Linguistics | 2 | 12% |
| Psychology | 1 | 6% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 2 | 12% |
| Unknown | 2 | 12% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 13 January 2022.
All research outputs
#2,611,765
of 25,806,763 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#377
of 2,320 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#43,545
of 349,819 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#3
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,806,763 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,320 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% 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 349,819 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.