↓ Skip to main content

Major mistakes and errors in the use of Trial Sequential Analysis in systematic reviews or meta-analyses – protocol for a systematic review

Overview of attention for article published in Systematic Reviews, June 2022
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (57th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
16 Mendeley
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
Major mistakes and errors in the use of Trial Sequential Analysis in systematic reviews or meta-analyses – protocol for a systematic review
Published in
Systematic Reviews, June 2022
DOI 10.1186/s13643-022-01987-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christian Gunge Riberholt, Markus Harboe Olsen, Joachim Birch Milan, Christian Gluud

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 16 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 3 19%
Student > Bachelor 2 13%
Researcher 2 13%
Student > Master 2 13%
Unknown 7 44%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 4 25%
Neuroscience 2 13%
Unknown 10 63%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 07 June 2022.
All research outputs
#13,674,739
of 23,312,088 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Reviews
#1,436
of 2,020 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#184,889
of 445,437 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Reviews
#30
of 52 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,312,088 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,020 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.9. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 445,437 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 52 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.