↓ Skip to main content

Protocol for a systematic review of the use of qualitative comparative analysis for evaluative questions in public health research

Overview of attention for article published in Systematic Reviews, November 2019
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
56 Mendeley
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.
Title
Protocol for a systematic review of the use of qualitative comparative analysis for evaluative questions in public health research
Published in
Systematic Reviews, November 2019
DOI 10.1186/s13643-019-1159-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Benjamin Hanckel, Mark Petticrew, James Thomas, Judith Green

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 56 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 56 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 14%
Student > Master 7 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 5%
Professor 2 4%
Other 9 16%
Unknown 17 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 12 21%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 14%
Arts and Humanities 4 7%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 4%
Other 7 13%
Unknown 21 38%
Attention Score in Context

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 08 November 2019.
All research outputs
#18,695,869
of 23,170,347 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Reviews
#1,798
of 2,014 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#271,251
of 362,940 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Reviews
#59
of 68 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,170,347 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,014 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.8. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% 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 362,940 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 68 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.