↓ Skip to main content

Using digital tools in the recruitment and retention in randomised controlled trials: survey of UK Clinical Trial Units and a qualitative study

Overview of attention for article published in Trials, April 2020
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
14 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
57 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
Using digital tools in the recruitment and retention in randomised controlled trials: survey of UK Clinical Trial Units and a qualitative study
Published in
Trials, April 2020
DOI 10.1186/s13063-020-04234-0
Authors

Amanda Blatch-Jones, Jacqueline Nuttall, Abby Bull, Louise Worswick, Mark Mullee, Robert Peveler, Stephen Falk, Neil Tape, Jeremy Hinks, Athene J. Lane, Jeremy C. Wyatt, Gareth Griffiths

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 57 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 13 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 12%
Researcher 6 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 5%
Other 2 4%
Other 5 9%
Unknown 21 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Business, Management and Accounting 9 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 7%
Psychology 4 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 5%
Other 7 12%
Unknown 22 39%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 06 April 2020.
All research outputs
#2,695,716
of 17,379,776 outputs
Outputs from Trials
#1,040
of 4,585 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#62,366
of 278,953 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Trials
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,379,776 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,585 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 278,953 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them