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 |
Lessons learnt recruiting to a multi-site UK cohort study to explore recovery of health and well-being after colorectal cancer (CREW study)
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Research Methodology, December 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2288-13-153 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Deborah Fenlon, Kim Chivers Seymour, Ikumi Okamoto, Jane Winter, Alison Richardson, Julia Addington-Hall, Jessica L Corner, Peter W Smith, Christine M May, Matthew Breckons, Claire Foster |
| Abstract |
The UK leads the world in recruitment of patients to cancer clinical trials, with a six-fold increase in recruitment during 2001-2010. However, there are large variations across cancer centres. This paper details recruitment to a large multi-centre prospective cohort study and discusses lessons learnt to enhance recruitment. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 | 4 | 67% |
| Germany | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 1 | 17% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 3 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 3 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 24 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 6 | 25% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 21% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 13% |
| Professor | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 2 | 8% |
| Unknown | 6 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 21% |
| Psychology | 4 | 17% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 8% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 8% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 9 | 38% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 24 February 2014.
All research outputs
#7,989,810
of 25,738,558 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#1,169
of 2,312 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#87,641
of 321,308 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#15
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,738,558 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,312 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.6. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% 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 321,308 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.