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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Accuracy of the Berger-Exner test for detecting third-order selection bias in randomised controlled trials: a simulation-based investigation
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Research Methodology, October 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2288-14-114 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Steffen Mickenautsch, Bo Fu, Sheila Gudehithlu, Vance W Berger |
| Abstract |
Randomised controlled trials (RCT) are highly influential upon medical decisions. Thus RCTs must not distort the truth. One threat to internal trial validity is the correct prediction of future allocations (selection bias). The Berger-Exner test detects such bias but has not been widely utilized in practice. One reason for this non-utilisation may be a lack of information regarding its test accuracy. The objective of this study is to assess the accuracy of the Berger-Exner test on the basis of relevant simulations for RCTs with dichotomous outcomes. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 15 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 27% |
| Researcher | 4 | 27% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 20% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 3 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 33% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 27% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 7% |
| Philosophy | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 4 | 27% |
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 09 July 2022.
All research outputs
#5,882,059
of 22,818,766 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#893
of 2,012 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#62,074
of 254,660 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#5
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,818,766 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,012 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 55% 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 254,660 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 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.