↓ Skip to main content

Facilitating accrual to cancer control and supportive care trials: the clinical research associate perspective

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Research Methodology, December 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
27 Mendeley
citeulike
2 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
Facilitating accrual to cancer control and supportive care trials: the clinical research associate perspective
Published in
BMC Medical Research Methodology, December 2013
DOI 10.1186/1471-2288-13-154
Pubmed ID
Authors

David VanHoff, Tanya Hesser, Katherine Patterson Kelly, David Freyer, Susan Stork, Lillian Sung

Abstract

Accrual to Cancer Control and Supportive Care (CCL) studies can be challenging. Our objective was to identify facilitators and perceived barriers to successful Children's Oncology Group (COG) CCL accrual from the clinical research associate (CRA) perspective.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 27 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 27 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 26%
Student > Master 5 19%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 11%
Student > Bachelor 2 7%
Lecturer 1 4%
Other 4 15%
Unknown 5 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 22%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 15%
Psychology 3 11%
Social Sciences 3 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 7%
Other 4 15%
Unknown 5 19%

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 31 December 2013.
All research outputs
#17,262,626
of 21,358,488 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#1,628
of 1,902 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#225,190
of 302,913 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#91
of 105 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,358,488 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,902 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.4. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% 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 302,913 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 105 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.