↓ Skip to main content

Reasons for participating in randomised controlled trials: conditional altruism and considerations for self

Overview of attention for article published in Trials, March 2010
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 (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
twitter
10 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
199 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
158 Mendeley
citeulike
2 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
Reasons for participating in randomised controlled trials: conditional altruism and considerations for self
Published in
Trials, March 2010
DOI 10.1186/1745-6215-11-31
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sharon K McCann, Marion K Campbell, Vikki A Entwistle

Abstract

Randomised controlled trials of healthcare interventions depend on the participation of volunteers who might not derive any personal health benefit from their participation. The idea that altruistic-type motives are important for trial participation is understandably widespread, but recent studies suggest considerations of personal benefit can influence participation decisions in various ways.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 158 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Unknown 154 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 32 20%
Student > Master 30 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 27 17%
Student > Bachelor 13 8%
Student > Postgraduate 8 5%
Other 27 17%
Unknown 21 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 45 28%
Social Sciences 21 13%
Psychology 17 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 4%
Other 29 18%
Unknown 28 18%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 25. 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 13 October 2016.
All research outputs
#769,544
of 15,045,928 outputs
Outputs from Trials
#212
of 3,919 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,184
of 158,228 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Trials
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,045,928 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,919 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 158,228 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them