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 |
Creating groups with similar expected behavioural response in randomized controlled trials: a fuzzy cognitive map approach
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Research Methodology, December 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2288-14-130 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Philippe J Giabbanelli, Rik Crutzen |
| Abstract |
Controlling bias is key to successful randomized controlled trials for behaviour change. Bias can be generated at multiple points during a study, for example, when participants are allocated to different groups. Several methods of allocations exist to randomly distribute participants over the groups such that their prognostic factors (e.g., socio-demographic variables) are similar, in an effort to keep participants' outcomes comparable at baseline. Since it is challenging to create such groups when all prognostic factors are taken together, these factors are often balanced in isolation or only the ones deemed most relevant are balanced. However, the complex interactions among prognostic factors may lead to a poor estimate of behaviour, causing unbalanced groups at baseline, which may introduce accidental bias. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 Kingdom | 2 | 67% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Scientists | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 1 | 2% |
| United States | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 56 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 8 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 12% |
| Researcher | 4 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 10 | 17% |
| Unknown | 18 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 19% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 14% |
| Psychology | 5 | 9% |
| Computer Science | 3 | 5% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 8 | 14% |
| Unknown | 21 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 23 December 2014.
All research outputs
#2,879,332
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#446
of 2,081 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#41,051
of 360,436 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#10
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,081 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% 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 360,436 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 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 58% of its contemporaries.