↓ Skip to main content

User experiences of evidence-based online resources for health professionals: User testing of The Cochrane Library

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, July 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 (81st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog

Readers on

mendeley
127 Mendeley
citeulike
6 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
User experiences of evidence-based online resources for health professionals: User testing of The Cochrane Library
Published in
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, July 2008
DOI 10.1186/1472-6947-8-34
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sarah E Rosenbaum, Claire Glenton, Jane Cracknell

Abstract

Evidence-based decision making relies on easy access to trustworthy research results. The Cochrane Library is a key source of evidence about the effect of interventions and aims to "promote the accessibility of systematic reviews to anyone wanting to make a decision about health care". We explored how health professionals found, used and experienced The Library, looking at facets of user experience including findability, usability, usefulness, credibility, desirability and value.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 127 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 6 5%
United Kingdom 4 3%
Egypt 1 <1%
New Zealand 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Saudi Arabia 1 <1%
Argentina 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 110 87%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 23 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 17%
Researcher 17 13%
Student > Postgraduate 9 7%
Professor > Associate Professor 8 6%
Other 33 26%
Unknown 15 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 35 28%
Computer Science 28 22%
Social Sciences 11 9%
Business, Management and Accounting 9 7%
Psychology 9 7%
Other 15 12%
Unknown 20 16%

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 29 August 2008.
All research outputs
#850,140
of 5,038,248 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#153
of 814 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,203
of 93,323 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#9
of 40 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 5,038,248 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 814 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 93,323 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 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 40 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.