Report for: Article

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
Published in	Current Controlled Trials in Cardiovascular Medicine, January 2000
DOI	10.1186/cvm-1-1-003
Pubmed ID	11714397
Authors	Iain Chalmers
Abstract	Some problems with the quality of controlled clinical trials can be addressed by following these procedures: registering all trials at inception; using systematic reviews to inform the design of new studies; posting and obtaining feedback on preprints; reporting all well conducted trials, regardless of their results; reducing biased and inefficient assessment of reports submitted for publication; publishing sufficiently detailed reports; linking trial reports to relevant external information; providing readier access to reports; and reviewing and amending reports after initial publication. The launch of a new range of electronic journals by Current Controlled Trials offers an opportunity to contribute to progress in these ways.

View on publisher site Alert me about new mentions

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Geographical breakdown

Country	Count	As %
United Kingdom	1	11%
Japan	1	11%
Italy	1	11%
Unknown	6	67%

Demographic breakdown

Type	Count	As %
Members of the public	8	89%
Scientists	1	11%

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country	Count	As %
United Kingdom	1	3%
Unknown	28	97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status	Count	As %
Researcher	5	17%
Student > Master	5	17%
Other	4	14%
Professor	2	7%
Student > Bachelor	2	7%
Other	8	28%
Unknown	3	10%

Readers by discipline	Count	As %
Medicine and Dentistry	10	34%
Social Sciences	4	14%
Nursing and Health Professions	2	7%
Immunology and Microbiology	2	7%
Mathematics	1	3%
Other	5	17%
Unknown	5	17%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 25. 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 10 November 2016.

All research outputs

#943,450

of 17,360,236 outputs

Outputs from Current Controlled Trials in Cardiovascular Medicine

of 26 outputs

Outputs of similar age

#8,557

of 221,101 outputs

Outputs of similar age from Current Controlled Trials in Cardiovascular Medicine

of 1 outputs

Altmetric has tracked 17,360,236 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.

So far Altmetric has tracked 26 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.3. This one scored the same or higher as 22 of them.

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 221,101 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.

We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them

Article

About this Attention Score

Mentioned by

Citations

Readers on

Twitter Demographics

Geographical breakdown

Demographic breakdown

Mendeley readers

Geographical breakdown

Demographic breakdown

Attention Score in Context