↓ Skip to main content

Characteristics of meta-analyses and their component studies in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews: a cross-sectional, descriptive analysis

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Research Methodology, November 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users
facebook
4 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
306 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
185 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
Characteristics of meta-analyses and their component studies in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews: a cross-sectional, descriptive analysis
Published in
BMC Medical Research Methodology, November 2011
DOI 10.1186/1471-2288-11-160
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jonathan Davey, Rebecca M Turner, Mike J Clarke, Julian PT Higgins

Abstract

Cochrane systematic reviews collate and summarise studies of the effects of healthcare interventions. The characteristics of these reviews and the meta-analyses and individual studies they contain provide insights into the nature of healthcare research and important context for the development of relevant statistical and other methods.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 185 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 3 2%
Canada 2 1%
France 1 <1%
Ireland 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Other 1 <1%
Unknown 172 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 32 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 31 17%
Student > Master 27 15%
Student > Bachelor 13 7%
Professor > Associate Professor 10 5%
Other 40 22%
Unknown 32 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 50 27%
Psychology 18 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 6%
Social Sciences 9 5%
Mathematics 9 5%
Other 37 20%
Unknown 51 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 04 November 2020.
All research outputs
#3,574,537
of 22,840,638 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#545
of 2,015 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#29,441
of 240,053 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#4
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,840,638 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,015 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 72% 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 240,053 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 87% 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 done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.