↓ Skip to main content
Embed badge What is this page?

Towards a methodology for cluster searching to provide conceptual and contextual “richness” for systematic reviews of complex interventions: case study (CLUSTER)

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Research Methodology, September 2013
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 (89th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
2 policy sources
twitter
14 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
123 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
170 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike

What is this page?

Summary Policy documents Twitter Dimensions citations
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
Towards a methodology for cluster searching to provide conceptual and contextual “richness” for systematic reviews of complex interventions: case study (CLUSTER)
Published in
BMC Medical Research Methodology, September 2013
DOI 10.1186/1471-2288-13-118
Pubmed ID
24073615
Authors

Andrew Booth, Janet Harris, Elizabeth Croot, Jane Springett, Fiona Campbell, Emma Wilkins

Abstract

Systematic review methodologies can be harnessed to help researchers to understand and explain how complex interventions may work. Typically, when reviewing complex interventions, a review team will seek to understand the theories that underpin an intervention and the specific context for that intervention. A single published report from a research project does not typically contain this required level of detail. A review team may find it more useful to examine a "study cluster"; a group of related papers that explore and explain various features of a single project and thus supply necessary detail relating to theory and/or context.We sought to conduct a preliminary investigation, from a single case study review, of techniques required to identify a cluster of related research reports, to document the yield from such methods, and to outline a systematic methodology for cluster searching.

View on publisher site

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 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 170 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 6 4%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Unknown 162 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 36 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 30 18%
Student > Master 23 14%
Librarian 8 5%
Other 8 5%
Other 40 24%
Unknown 25 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 48 28%
Social Sciences 31 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 15 9%
Psychology 14 8%
Business, Management and Accounting 6 4%
Other 21 12%
Unknown 35 21%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 23 July 2020.
All research outputs
#2,195,410
of 21,806,258 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#352
of 1,934 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#20,015
of 185,589 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,806,258 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,934 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 185,589 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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

This page is provided by Altmetric.