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 |
When is enough, enough? Understanding and solving your sample size problems in health services research
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Research Notes, February 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13104-016-1893-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Victoria Pye, Natalie Taylor, Robyn Clay-Williams, Jeffrey Braithwaite |
| Abstract |
Health services researchers face two obstacles to sample size calculation: inaccessible, highly specialised or overly technical literature, and difficulty securing methodologists during the planning stages of research. The purpose of this article is to provide pragmatic sample size calculation guidance for researchers who are designing a health services study. We aimed to create a simplified and generalizable process for sample size calculation, by (1) summarising key factors and considerations in determining a sample size, (2) developing practical steps for researchers-illustrated by a case study and, (3) providing a list of resources to steer researchers to the next stage of their calculations. Health services researchers can use this guidance to improve their understanding of sample size calculation, and implement these steps in their research practice. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 88 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 1 | 1% |
| Italy | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 86 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 13% |
| Researcher | 11 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 10 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 9% |
| Lecturer | 8 | 9% |
| Other | 18 | 20% |
| Unknown | 22 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 18 | 20% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 10 | 11% |
| Sports and Recreations | 5 | 6% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 3 | 3% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 17 | 19% |
| Unknown | 32 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 20 March 2016.
All research outputs
#17,388,351
of 25,516,314 outputs
Outputs from BMC Research Notes
#2,506
of 4,521 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#250,756
of 410,697 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Research Notes
#71
of 115 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,516,314 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,521 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 410,697 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 115 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.