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 |
Strategies for obtaining unpublished drug trial data: a qualitative interview study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Systematic Reviews, May 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/2046-4053-2-31 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Nicole Wolfe, Peter C Gøtzsche, Lisa Bero |
| Abstract |
Authors of systematic reviews have difficulty obtaining unpublished data for their reviews. This project aimed to provide an in-depth description of the experiences of authors in searching for and gaining access to unpublished data for their systematic reviews, and to give guidance on best practices for identifying, obtaining and using unpublished data. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 20 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 | 9 | 45% |
| United States | 1 | 5% |
| Australia | 1 | 5% |
| Spain | 1 | 5% |
| Papua New Guinea | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 7 | 35% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 11 | 55% |
| Scientists | 5 | 25% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 15% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 5% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 54 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 4% |
| Denmark | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 51 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 10 | 19% |
| Librarian | 7 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 11% |
| Other | 6 | 11% |
| Other | 12 | 22% |
| Unknown | 6 | 11% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 16 | 30% |
| Psychology | 6 | 11% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 9% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 9 | 17% |
| Unknown | 12 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 July 2022.
All research outputs
#3,168,571
of 25,595,500 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Reviews
#570
of 2,242 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#26,188
of 207,750 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Reviews
#9
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,595,500 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,242 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% 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 207,750 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 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 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 65% of its contemporaries.