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 |
Systematic mapping of existing tools to appraise methodological strengths and limitations of qualitative research: first stage in the development of the CAMELOT tool
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Research Methodology, June 2019
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12874-019-0728-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Heather Menzies Munthe-Kaas, Claire Glenton, Andrew Booth, Jane Noyes, Simon Lewin |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 65 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 | 23 | 35% |
| Ireland | 5 | 8% |
| Canada | 4 | 6% |
| United States | 3 | 5% |
| Spain | 2 | 3% |
| Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of | 1 | 2% |
| Curaçao | 1 | 2% |
| Mexico | 1 | 2% |
| Nigeria | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 5% |
| Unknown | 21 | 32% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 39 | 60% |
| Scientists | 18 | 28% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 5 | 8% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 3 | 5% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 223 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 223 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 34 | 15% |
| Researcher | 22 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 16 | 7% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 15 | 7% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 13 | 6% |
| Other | 53 | 24% |
| Unknown | 70 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 40 | 18% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 28 | 13% |
| Social Sciences | 16 | 7% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 15 | 7% |
| Psychology | 14 | 6% |
| Other | 35 | 16% |
| Unknown | 75 | 34% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 41. 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 04 November 2021.
All research outputs
#1,003,722
of 25,354,251 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#97
of 2,259 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#22,051
of 359,566 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#6
of 64 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,354,251 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,259 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 95% 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 359,566 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 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 64 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 92% of its contemporaries.