↓ Skip to main content

Evidence-based mapping of design heterogeneity prior to meta-analysis: a systematic review and evidence synthesis

Overview of attention for article published in Systematic Reviews, July 2014
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 (92nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (79th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
23 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
79 Mendeley
citeulike
1 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
Evidence-based mapping of design heterogeneity prior to meta-analysis: a systematic review and evidence synthesis
Published in
Systematic Reviews, July 2014
DOI 10.1186/2046-4053-3-80
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michelle D Althuis, Douglas L Weed, Cara L Frankenfeld

Abstract

Assessment of design heterogeneity conducted prior to meta-analysis is infrequently reported; it is often presented post hoc to explain statistical heterogeneity. However, design heterogeneity determines the mix of included studies and how they are analyzed in a meta-analysis, which in turn can importantly influence the results. The goal of this work is to introduce ways to improve the assessment and reporting of design heterogeneity prior to statistical summarization of epidemiologic studies.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 23 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 79 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 4 5%
Spain 1 1%
Germany 1 1%
Brazil 1 1%
Unknown 72 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 12 15%
Researcher 11 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 14%
Student > Bachelor 6 8%
Professor 5 6%
Other 17 22%
Unknown 17 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 23 29%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 11%
Social Sciences 7 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 4%
Other 15 19%
Unknown 19 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. 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 11 September 2014.
All research outputs
#1,811,072
of 24,764,450 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Reviews
#292
of 2,158 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,977
of 234,029 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Reviews
#7
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,764,450 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,158 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 234,029 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 29 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.