↓ Skip to main content

Strategies for eliciting and synthesizing evidence for guidelines in rare diseases

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Research Methodology, March 2019
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 (90th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
33 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
41 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
97 Mendeley
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
Strategies for eliciting and synthesizing evidence for guidelines in rare diseases
Published in
BMC Medical Research Methodology, March 2019
DOI 10.1186/s12874-019-0713-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Menaka Pai, Cindy H. T. Yeung, Elie A. Akl, Andrea Darzi, Christopher Hillis, Kimberly Legault, Joerg J. Meerpohl, Nancy Santesso, Domenica Taruscio, Madeleine Verhovsek, Holger J. Schünemann, Alfonso Iorio

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 33 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 97 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 97 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 19 20%
Student > Bachelor 12 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 10%
Other 8 8%
Student > Master 7 7%
Other 15 15%
Unknown 26 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 31 32%
Social Sciences 7 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 5%
Psychology 4 4%
Other 15 15%
Unknown 29 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 26. 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 11 November 2020.
All research outputs
#1,426,222
of 24,988,543 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#167
of 2,229 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#32,450
of 357,886 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#10
of 62 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,988,543 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 2,229 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 357,886 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 62 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.