↓ Skip to main content

The effect of an internet option and single-sided printing format to increase the response rate to a population-based study: a randomized controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Research Methodology, September 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (77th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
11 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
23 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
The effect of an internet option and single-sided printing format to increase the response rate to a population-based study: a randomized controlled trial
Published in
BMC Medical Research Methodology, September 2014
DOI 10.1186/1471-2288-14-104
Pubmed ID
Authors

Elisa Flüß, Christine M Bond, Gareth T Jones, Gary J Macfarlane

Abstract

Paper questionnaires are a common means to collect self-reported information in population-based epidemiological studies. Over the past decades, the response rates to epidemiological studies have been decreasing which can affect the selection process of eligible subjects and lead to non-response bias. Hence, research into strategies to increase questionnaire response rates is crucial. The aim of this study was therefore to explore the effectiveness of single-sided questionnaires and an internet option for response in increasing response rates to a population-based study.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 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 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 23 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 4 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 9%
Professor 2 9%
Student > Master 1 4%
Other 2 9%
Unknown 9 39%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 22%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 9%
Social Sciences 2 9%
Psychology 1 4%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 11 48%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 02 April 2019.
All research outputs
#5,440,940
of 22,763,032 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#763
of 2,010 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#53,294
of 238,632 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#2
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,763,032 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 76th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,010 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% 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 238,632 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 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.