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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Error and bias in under-5 mortality estimates derived from birth histories with small sample sizes
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Population Health Metrics, July 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1478-7954-11-13 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Laura Dwyer-Lindgren, Emmanuela Gakidou, Abraham Flaxman, Haidong Wang |
| Abstract |
Estimates of under-5 mortality at the national level for countries without high-quality vital registration systems are routinely derived from birth history data in censuses and surveys. Subnational or stratified analyses of under-5 mortality could also be valuable, but the usefulness of under-5 mortality estimates derived from birth histories from relatively small samples of women is not known. We aim to assess the magnitude and direction of error that can be expected for estimates derived from birth histories with small samples of women using various analysis methods. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 35 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 3% |
| Kenya | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 33 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 10 | 29% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 17% |
| Researcher | 4 | 11% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 9% |
| Other | 6 | 17% |
| Unknown | 2 | 6% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 13 | 37% |
| Social Sciences | 9 | 26% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 9% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 6% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 3 | 9% |
| Unknown | 3 | 9% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 28 October 2013.
All research outputs
#20,207,295
of 22,727,570 outputs
Outputs from Population Health Metrics
#380
of 392 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#173,956
of 197,917 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Population Health Metrics
#9
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,727,570 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 392 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.7. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 197,917 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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.