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 |
Statistics review 4: Sample size calculations
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Critical Care, May 2002
|
| DOI | 10.1186/cc1521 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Elise Whitley, Jonathan Ball |
| Abstract |
The present review introduces the notion of statistical power and the hazard of under-powered studies. The problem of how to calculate an ideal sample size is also discussed within the context of factors that affect power, and specific methods for the calculation of sample size are presented for two common scenarios, along with extensions to the simplest case. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 States | 2 | 67% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 33% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 33% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 1,580 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 25 | 2% |
| Brazil | 14 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 10 | <1% |
| Canada | 10 | <1% |
| Denmark | 8 | <1% |
| Germany | 6 | <1% |
| India | 6 | <1% |
| Switzerland | 5 | <1% |
| Nigeria | 4 | <1% |
| Other | 54 | 3% |
| Unknown | 1438 | 91% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 295 | 19% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 254 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 191 | 12% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 141 | 9% |
| Other | 119 | 8% |
| Other | 401 | 25% |
| Unknown | 179 | 11% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 622 | 39% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 204 | 13% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 61 | 4% |
| Psychology | 56 | 4% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 53 | 3% |
| Other | 341 | 22% |
| Unknown | 243 | 15% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 17 July 2014.
All research outputs
#2,803,346
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#2,410
of 6,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,493
of 127,382 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#3
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,554 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% 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 127,382 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 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 6 of them.