↓ Skip to main content

Harmonisation of variables names prior to conducting statistical analyses with multiple datasets: an automated approach

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, May 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
14 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Harmonisation of variables names prior to conducting statistical analyses with multiple datasets: an automated approach
Published in
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, May 2011
DOI 10.1186/1472-6947-11-33
Pubmed ID
Authors

Xavier Bosch-Capblanch

Abstract

Data requirements by governments, donors and the international community to measure health and development achievements have increased in the last decade. Datasets produced in surveys conducted in several countries and years are often combined to analyse time trends and geographical patterns of demographic and health related indicators. However, since not all datasets have the same structure, variables definitions and codes, they have to be harmonised prior to submitting them to the statistical analyses. Manually searching, renaming and recoding variables are extremely tedious and prone to errors tasks, overall when the number of datasets and variables are large. This article presents an automated approach to harmonise variables names across several datasets, which optimises the search of variables, minimises manual inputs and reduces the risk of error.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 14 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 14 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 29%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 2 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 14%
Lecturer 1 7%
Other 1 7%
Other 1 7%
Unknown 3 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 36%
Social Sciences 4 29%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 7%
Unknown 3 21%
Attention Score in Context

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 06 February 2014.
All research outputs
#14,172,739
of 22,715,151 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#1,101
of 1,982 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#81,153
of 111,876 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#12
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,715,151 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,982 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% 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 111,876 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.