↓ Skip to main content

Systematic reviews of adverse effects: framework for a structured approach

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Research Methodology, July 2007
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 (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
186 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
208 Mendeley
citeulike
8 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
Systematic reviews of adverse effects: framework for a structured approach
Published in
BMC Medical Research Methodology, July 2007
DOI 10.1186/1471-2288-7-32
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yoon K Loke, Deirdre Price, Andrew Herxheimer

Abstract

As every healthcare intervention carries some risk of harm, clinical decision making needs to be supported by a systematic assessment of the balance of benefit to harm. A systematic review that considers only the favourable outcomes of an intervention, without also assessing the adverse effects, can mislead by introducing a bias favouring the intervention. Much of the current guidance on systematic reviews is directed towards the evaluation of effectiveness; but this differs in important ways from the methods used in assessing the safety and tolerability of an intervention. A detailed discussion of why, how and when to include adverse effects in a systematic review, is required.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 208 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 6 3%
United Kingdom 5 2%
Brazil 2 <1%
Canada 2 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Colombia 1 <1%
Unknown 191 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 41 20%
Student > Master 31 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 27 13%
Student > Postgraduate 14 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 13 6%
Other 63 30%
Unknown 19 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 101 49%
Social Sciences 16 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 15 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 8 4%
Other 31 15%
Unknown 29 14%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. 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 21 February 2021.
All research outputs
#1,383,103
of 18,702,874 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#208
of 1,695 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#16,665
of 203,719 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 18,702,874 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 1,695 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 203,719 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 91% 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