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 |
How to get started with a systematic review in epidemiology: an introductory guide for early career researchers
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Archives of Public Health, August 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/0778-7367-71-21 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Hayley J Denison, Richard M Dodds, Georgia Ntani, Rachel Cooper, Cyrus Cooper, Avan Aihie Sayer, Janis Baird |
| Abstract |
Systematic review is a powerful research tool which aims to identify and synthesize all evidence relevant to a research question. The approach taken is much like that used in a scientific experiment, with high priority given to the transparency and reproducibility of the methods used and to handling all evidence in a consistent manner.Early career researchers may find themselves in a position where they decide to undertake a systematic review, for example it may form part or all of a PhD thesis. Those with no prior experience of systematic review may need considerable support and direction getting started with such a project. Here we set out in simple terms how to get started with a systematic review. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 256 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | <1% |
| Ghana | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Colombia | 1 | <1% |
| Peru | 1 | <1% |
| Sweden | 1 | <1% |
| Nigeria | 1 | <1% |
| Sri Lanka | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 247 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 62 | 24% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 40 | 16% |
| Researcher | 34 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 17 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 16 | 6% |
| Other | 44 | 17% |
| Unknown | 43 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 77 | 30% |
| Social Sciences | 25 | 10% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 18 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 18 | 7% |
| Psychology | 13 | 5% |
| Other | 48 | 19% |
| Unknown | 57 | 22% |
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 27 January 2019.
All research outputs
#15,739,529
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Archives of Public Health
#648
of 1,144 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#118,348
of 208,915 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Archives of Public Health
#8
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 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 1,144 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% 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 208,915 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 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.