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 |
Lack of systematicity in research prioritisation processes — a scoping review of evidence syntheses
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Systematic Reviews, December 2022
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13643-022-02149-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Hans Lund, Lars Tang, Ingrid Poulsen, Karen la Cour, Merete Bjerrum, Claus Vinther Nielsen, Thomas Maribo |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 | 3 | 60% |
| Unknown | 2 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 60% |
| Scientists | 2 | 40% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 23 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 9% |
| Librarian | 1 | 4% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 4% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 4 | 17% |
| Unknown | 11 | 48% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 26% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 4% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 4% |
| Engineering | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 13 | 57% |
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 24 December 2022.
All research outputs
#13,574,494
of 23,408,972 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Reviews
#1,420
of 2,034 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#163,049
of 433,478 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Reviews
#22
of 48 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,408,972 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 2,034 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 29th percentile – i.e., 29% 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 433,478 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 61% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 48 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 54% of its contemporaries.