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 |
Why prospective registration of systematic reviews makes sense
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Systematic Reviews, February 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/2046-4053-1-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Lesley Stewart, David Moher, Paul Shekelle |
| Abstract |
Prospective registration of systematic reviews promotes transparency, helps reduce potential for bias and serves to avoid unintended duplication of reviews. Registration offers advantages to many stakeholders in return for modest additional effort from the researchers registering their reviews. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 17 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 | 6 | 35% |
| Spain | 2 | 12% |
| Chile | 2 | 12% |
| Norway | 1 | 6% |
| Australia | 1 | 6% |
| Latvia | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 4 | 24% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 11 | 65% |
| Scientists | 4 | 24% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 6% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 6% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 261 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 259 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 48 | 18% |
| Researcher | 36 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 29 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 17 | 7% |
| Lecturer | 11 | 4% |
| Other | 49 | 19% |
| Unknown | 71 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 65 | 25% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 26 | 10% |
| Psychology | 19 | 7% |
| Social Sciences | 11 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 10 | 4% |
| Other | 44 | 17% |
| Unknown | 86 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 28. 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 19 April 2022.
All research outputs
#1,396,345
of 25,654,806 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Reviews
#203
of 2,244 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,211
of 255,458 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Reviews
#3
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,654,806 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 2,244 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 90% 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 255,458 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 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.