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 |
A failed attempt to conduct an individual patient data meta-analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Systematic Reviews, September 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/2046-4053-3-97 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Gerald J Jaspers, Pieter LJ Degraeuwe |
| Abstract |
A study-level meta-analysis has shown that proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy is a promising prognostic marker in neonatal hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy. An individual patient data meta-analysis could yield a prognostic tool with improved accuracy enabling well-founded clinical decisions. Our request to share patient data remained unanswered by five out of 18 research groups. Another four declined collaboration for various reasons, including own reanalysis of the data, and lack of parental consent. With less than 40% of the individual patient data available, we refrained from pursuing the proposed study. As future patients may benefit from it, policies mandating data sharing should be introduced. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 7 | 30% |
| United Kingdom | 5 | 22% |
| France | 2 | 9% |
| Colombia | 2 | 9% |
| Canada | 1 | 4% |
| Australia | 1 | 4% |
| Maldives | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 4 | 17% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 17 | 74% |
| Scientists | 5 | 22% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 4% |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 26 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 6 | 22% |
| Other | 5 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 15% |
| Researcher | 3 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 11% |
| Other | 2 | 7% |
| Unknown | 4 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 33% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 11% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 7% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 5 | 19% |
| Unknown | 5 | 19% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 January 2016.
All research outputs
#2,619,290
of 25,342,911 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Reviews
#450
of 2,220 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#26,290
of 245,035 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Reviews
#7
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,342,911 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,220 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 79% 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 245,035 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.