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 |
Researching complementary and alternative treatments – the gatekeepers are not at home
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Research Methodology, February 2007
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2288-7-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Vinjar Fønnebø, Sameline Grimsgaard, Harald Walach, Cheryl Ritenbaugh, Arne Johan Norheim, Hugh MacPherson, George Lewith, Laila Launsø, Mary Koithan, Torkel Falkenberg, Heather Boon, Mikel Aickin |
| Abstract |
To explore the strengths and weaknesses of conventional biomedical research strategies and methods as applied to complementary and alternative medicine (CAM), and to suggest a new research framework for assessing these treatment modalities. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 171 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 2 | 1% |
| United States | 2 | 1% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Switzerland | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 162 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 38 | 22% |
| Student > Master | 32 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 20 | 12% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 9 | 5% |
| Other | 8 | 5% |
| Other | 33 | 19% |
| Unknown | 31 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 68 | 40% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 14 | 8% |
| Social Sciences | 12 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 11 | 6% |
| Psychology | 8 | 5% |
| Other | 21 | 12% |
| Unknown | 37 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 29 September 2011.
All research outputs
#20,147,309
of 22,653,392 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#1,862
of 2,000 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#156,772
of 161,336 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#6
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,653,392 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,000 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 161,336 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.