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 |
A scoping review of network meta-analyses assessing the efficacy and safety of complementary and alternative medicine interventions
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Systematic Reviews, April 2020
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13643-020-01328-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Misty Pratt, Susan Wieland, Nadera Ahmadzai, Claire Butler, Dianna Wolfe, Kusala Pussagoda, Becky Skidmore, Argie Veroniki, Patricia Rios, Andrea C. Tricco, Brian Hutton |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 3 | 30% |
| United States | 2 | 20% |
| Philippines | 1 | 10% |
| Unknown | 4 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 50% |
| Scientists | 3 | 30% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 134 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 134 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 18 | 13% |
| Researcher | 13 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 12 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 8 | 6% |
| Other | 15 | 11% |
| Unknown | 57 | 43% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 22 | 16% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 21 | 16% |
| Psychology | 8 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 2% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 3 | 2% |
| Other | 16 | 12% |
| Unknown | 61 | 46% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 31 May 2020.
All research outputs
#5,539,992
of 23,310,485 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Reviews
#946
of 2,020 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#110,995
of 378,264 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Reviews
#37
of 69 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,310,485 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 76th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,020 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% 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 378,264 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 69 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.