↓ Skip to main content

A systematic review of the content of critical appraisal tools

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Research Methodology, September 2004
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 (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
15 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
228 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
786 Mendeley
citeulike
8 CiteULike
connotea
1 Connotea
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
A systematic review of the content of critical appraisal tools
Published in
BMC Medical Research Methodology, September 2004
DOI 10.1186/1471-2288-4-22
Pubmed ID
Authors

Persis Katrak, Andrea E Bialocerkowski, Nicola Massy-Westropp, VS Saravana Kumar, Karen A Grimmer

Abstract

Consumers of research (researchers, administrators, educators and clinicians) frequently use standard critical appraisal tools to evaluate the quality of published research reports. However, there is no consensus regarding the most appropriate critical appraisal tool for allied health research. We summarized the content, intent, construction and psychometric properties of published, currently available critical appraisal tools to identify common elements and their relevance to allied health research.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 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 786 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 12 2%
Canada 4 <1%
Indonesia 2 <1%
Brazil 2 <1%
United Arab Emirates 1 <1%
Zambia 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Other 6 <1%
Unknown 755 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 235 30%
Student > Bachelor 75 10%
Student > Postgraduate 74 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 72 9%
Researcher 56 7%
Other 192 24%
Unknown 82 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 227 29%
Nursing and Health Professions 207 26%
Social Sciences 67 9%
Psychology 49 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 27 3%
Other 110 14%
Unknown 99 13%

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 26 April 2021.
All research outputs
#1,624,606
of 17,617,388 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#272
of 1,639 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#22,362
of 257,698 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,617,388 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,639 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.9. 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 257,698 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 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them