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 |
Increasing the evidence base in journalology: creating an international best practice journal research network
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medicine, October 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12916-016-0707-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
David Moher, Philippe Ravaud |
| Abstract |
Biomedical journals continue to be the single most important conduit for disseminating biomedical knowledge. Unlike clinical medicine, where evidence is considered fundamental to practice, journals still operate largely in a 'black box' mode without sufficient evidence to drive their practice. We believe there is an immediate need to substantially increase the amount and quality of research by journals to ensure their practice is as evidence based as possible. To achieve this goal, we are proposing the development of an international 'best practice journal research network'. We invite journals and others to join the network. Such a network is likely to improve the quality of journals. It is also likely to address many unanswered questions in publication science, including peer review, which can provide robust and generalizable answers. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 49 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 | 14 | 29% |
| Italy | 4 | 8% |
| Australia | 3 | 6% |
| Canada | 2 | 4% |
| United States | 2 | 4% |
| Saudi Arabia | 1 | 2% |
| Curaçao | 1 | 2% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 2% |
| Germany | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 6% |
| Unknown | 17 | 35% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 27 | 55% |
| Scientists | 14 | 29% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 5 | 10% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 3 | 6% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 13 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 13 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 15% |
| Professor | 2 | 15% |
| Other | 1 | 8% |
| Other | 3 | 23% |
| Unknown | 1 | 8% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 69% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 8% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 2 | 15% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 28. 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 01 December 2016.
All research outputs
#1,355,167
of 24,974,461 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medicine
#953
of 3,902 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#24,423
of 327,335 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medicine
#21
of 65 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,974,461 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,902 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 45.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% 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 327,335 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 65 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.