↓ Skip to main content

Conducting a meta-ethnography of qualitative literature: Lessons learnt

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Research Methodology, April 2008
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (82nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
2 policy sources
twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
543 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
759 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
Conducting a meta-ethnography of qualitative literature: Lessons learnt
Published in
BMC Medical Research Methodology, April 2008
DOI 10.1186/1471-2288-8-21
Pubmed ID
Authors

Salla Atkins, Simon Lewin, Helen Smith, Mark Engel, Atle Fretheim, Jimmy Volmink

Abstract

Qualitative synthesis has become more commonplace in recent years. Meta-ethnography is one of several methods for synthesising qualitative research and is being used increasingly within health care research. However, many aspects of the steps in the process remain ill-defined.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 759 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 16 2%
Germany 2 <1%
Canada 2 <1%
Denmark 2 <1%
Netherlands 2 <1%
France 2 <1%
Italy 2 <1%
South Africa 2 <1%
United States 2 <1%
Other 7 <1%
Unknown 720 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 167 22%
Student > Master 131 17%
Researcher 115 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 66 9%
Student > Bachelor 35 5%
Other 153 20%
Unknown 92 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 173 23%
Medicine and Dentistry 144 19%
Psychology 107 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 65 9%
Business, Management and Accounting 36 5%
Other 105 14%
Unknown 129 17%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 04 June 2021.
All research outputs
#3,367,962
of 18,800,073 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#581
of 1,702 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#44,844
of 271,628 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#19
of 125 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 18,800,073 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,702 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% 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 271,628 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 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 125 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.