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 |
Evidence summaries: the evolution of a rapid review approach
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Systematic Reviews, February 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/2046-4053-1-10 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Sara Khangura, Kristin Konnyu, Rob Cushman, Jeremy Grimshaw, David Moher |
| Abstract |
Rapid reviews have emerged as a streamlined approach to synthesizing evidence - typically for informing emergent decisions faced by decision makers in health care settings. Although there is growing use of rapid review 'methods', and proliferation of rapid review products, there is a dearth of published literature on rapid review methodology. This paper outlines our experience with rapidly producing, publishing and disseminating evidence summaries in the context of our Knowledge to Action (KTA) research program. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 35 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 | 7 | 20% |
| Canada | 5 | 14% |
| United States | 4 | 11% |
| Colombia | 3 | 9% |
| Spain | 2 | 6% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 3% |
| Australia | 1 | 3% |
| Mexico | 1 | 3% |
| Latvia | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 9 | 26% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 23 | 66% |
| Scientists | 6 | 17% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 5 | 14% |
| Unknown | 1 | 3% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 1,086 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 8 | <1% |
| Canada | 7 | <1% |
| United States | 3 | <1% |
| Italy | 2 | <1% |
| Peru | 2 | <1% |
| Switzerland | 1 | <1% |
| South Africa | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 4 | <1% |
| Unknown | 1056 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 192 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 156 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 133 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 71 | 7% |
| Other | 68 | 6% |
| Other | 238 | 22% |
| Unknown | 228 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 245 | 23% |
| Social Sciences | 134 | 12% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 102 | 9% |
| Psychology | 78 | 7% |
| Computer Science | 29 | 3% |
| Other | 206 | 19% |
| Unknown | 292 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 77. 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 07 November 2023.
All research outputs
#567,411
of 25,837,817 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Reviews
#65
of 2,249 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,180
of 258,426 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Reviews
#1
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,837,817 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,249 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 258,426 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.