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 |
Two-stage estimation to adjust for treatment switching in randomised trials: a simulation study investigating the use of inverse probability weighting instead of re-censoring
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Research Methodology, March 2019
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12874-019-0709-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
N. R. Latimer, K. R. Abrams, U. Siebert |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 | 50% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Scientists | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 30 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 5 | 17% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 3 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 7% |
| Researcher | 2 | 7% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 3 | 10% |
| Unknown | 14 | 47% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Mathematics | 4 | 13% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 13% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 7% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 2 | 7% |
| Psychology | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 2 | 7% |
| Unknown | 14 | 47% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 02 July 2020.
All research outputs
#5,637,192
of 23,140,503 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#793
of 2,038 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#104,832
of 351,132 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#38
of 61 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,140,503 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,038 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 60% 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 351,132 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 61 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.