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 |
Risk of bias of randomized controlled trials published in orthopaedic journals
|
---|---|
Published in |
BMC Medical Research Methodology, June 2013
|
DOI | 10.1186/1471-2288-13-76 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Laura E Chess, Joel Gagnier |
Abstract |
The purpose of this study was to assess the quality of methodology in orthopaedics-related randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published from January 2006 to December 2010 in the top orthopaedic journals based on impact scores from the Thompson ISI citation reports (2010). |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 | 1 | 25% |
Canada | 1 | 25% |
Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 2 | 50% |
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United States | 1 | 2% |
Australia | 1 | 2% |
Unknown | 55 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Researcher | 8 | 14% |
Student > Master | 8 | 14% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 12% |
Student > Bachelor | 6 | 11% |
Other | 5 | 9% |
Other | 14 | 25% |
Unknown | 9 | 16% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 31 | 54% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 9% |
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 4% |
Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 2 | 4% |
Social Sciences | 2 | 4% |
Other | 2 | 4% |
Unknown | 13 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 30 January 2021.
All research outputs
#15,012,462
of 24,276,163 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#1,442
of 2,155 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#112,918
of 201,364 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#17
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,276,163 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,155 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.5. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% 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 201,364 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.