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 |
Factors associated with citation rate of randomised controlled trials in physiotherapy
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Archives of Physiotherapy, September 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s40945-015-0009-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Matteo Paci, Niccolò Landi, Gennaro Briganti, Bruna Lombardi |
| Abstract |
Despite the use of citation rate as a measure of quality of research is strongly criticized and debated, it remain a widely used method to evaluate performances of researchers, articles and journals. The aim of this study was to test which factors are associated with citation rate of Randomised Controlled Trials (RCTs) published on the physiotherapy field. All RCTs abstracted in the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro), indexed in Scopus database and published in 2008 were included. PEDro score, language of publication, indexing in PubMed database, type of access to articles, subdiscipline, the number of authors, the country where the study was performed, the type of institution where the study was conducted and the number of centres involved in the study (multicentric vs single-centre). and the 2013 5-year impact factor of the publishing journals were considered as independent variables. Citation rate until December 2013 was extracted from Scopus database and used as dependent variable. Six hundred and nineteen RCTs, published in 283 journals, were included and analysed. The 5-year impact factor was the strongest variable associated with the citation rate and explained approximately 50 % of the variance, and the number of authors explained an additional small part (about 1 %) of variability. The other variables were excluded from the model. The study highlights that 5-year Impact Factor, not accessibility (language of publication, indexing in PubMed database or the type of access to articles) or reported quality (PEDro score), is a strong predictor of the number of citations for RCTs in the physiotherapy field. Our findings support the increasingly widespread idea that citation analysis does not reflect the scientific merit of the cited work, at least in terms of reported quality.The results of this study need to be confirmed with a publication window larger than one year. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 6 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 6 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unspecified | 1 | 17% |
| Librarian | 1 | 17% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 3 | 50% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unspecified | 1 | 17% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 4 | 67% |
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 28 August 2016.
All research outputs
#15,345,593
of 22,826,360 outputs
Outputs from Archives of Physiotherapy
#123
of 141 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#156,589
of 266,863 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Archives of Physiotherapy
#4
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,826,360 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 141 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.1. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% 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 266,863 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.