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 |
Development of the WHO-INTEGRATE evidence-to-decision framework: an overview of systematic reviews of decision criteria for health decision-making
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation, February 2020
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12962-020-0203-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
J. M. Stratil, R. Baltussen, I. Scheel, A. Nacken, E. A. Rehfuess |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 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 | 2 | 20% |
| Ireland | 2 | 20% |
| Australia | 2 | 20% |
| Unknown | 4 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 7 | 70% |
| Scientists | 3 | 30% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 100 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 100 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 15 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 11 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 9% |
| Other | 6 | 6% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 5% |
| Other | 17 | 17% |
| Unknown | 37 | 37% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 17 | 17% |
| Social Sciences | 8 | 8% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 8% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 5 | 5% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 4 | 4% |
| Other | 16 | 16% |
| Unknown | 42 | 42% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 16 February 2020.
All research outputs
#6,222,301
of 23,192,960 outputs
Outputs from Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation
#192
of 432 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#134,066
of 456,021 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation
#3
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,192,960 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 432 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% 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 456,021 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.