↓ Skip to main content

Why clinical trial outcomes fail to translate into benefits for patients

Overview of attention for article published in Trials, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#6 of 6,665)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets
blogs
9 blogs
policy
1 policy source
twitter
691 X users
facebook
4 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page
googleplus
5 Google+ users
reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
266 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
387 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
Why clinical trial outcomes fail to translate into benefits for patients
Published in
Trials, March 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13063-017-1870-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Carl Heneghan, Ben Goldacre, Kamal R. Mahtani

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 691 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 387 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 387 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 65 17%
Student > Master 50 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 42 11%
Student > Bachelor 29 7%
Other 26 7%
Other 80 21%
Unknown 95 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 117 30%
Nursing and Health Professions 28 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 20 5%
Psychology 16 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 13 3%
Other 76 20%
Unknown 117 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 493. 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 11 March 2024.
All research outputs
#56,074
of 26,378,648 outputs
Outputs from Trials
#6
of 6,665 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,208
of 326,580 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Trials
#1
of 122 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,378,648 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,665 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 326,580 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 122 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.