↓ Skip to main content

“Best fit” framework synthesis: refining the method

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Research Methodology, March 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
4 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
250 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
374 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
“Best fit” framework synthesis: refining the method
Published in
BMC Medical Research Methodology, March 2013
DOI 10.1186/1471-2288-13-37
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christopher Carroll, Andrew Booth, Joanna Leaviss, Jo Rick

Abstract

Following publication of the first worked example of the "best fit" method of evidence synthesis for the systematic review of qualitative evidence in this journal, the originators of the method identified a need to specify more fully some aspects of this particular derivative of framework synthesis.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 374 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 4 1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Chile 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 364 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 70 19%
Student > Master 64 17%
Researcher 52 14%
Student > Bachelor 22 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 21 6%
Other 72 19%
Unknown 73 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 95 25%
Nursing and Health Professions 50 13%
Social Sciences 40 11%
Psychology 29 8%
Business, Management and Accounting 17 5%
Other 53 14%
Unknown 90 24%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 31 July 2018.
All research outputs
#4,195,540
of 17,361,274 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#604
of 1,610 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#35,700
of 159,444 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,361,274 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,610 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% 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 159,444 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 77% 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