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 focus on cross-purpose tools, automated recognition of study design in multiple disciplines, and evaluation of automation tools: a summary of significant discussions at the fourth meeting of the International Collaboration for Automation of Systematic Reviews (ICASR)
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Systematic Reviews, May 2020
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13643-020-01351-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Annette M. O’Connor, Paul Glasziou, Michele Taylor, James Thomas, René Spijker, Mary S. Wolfe |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 1 | 14% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 14% |
| Unknown | 5 | 71% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 7 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 27 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 27 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 7 | 26% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 7% |
| Professor | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 2 | 7% |
| Unknown | 8 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 15% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 7% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 7% |
| Engineering | 2 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 8 | 30% |
| Unknown | 8 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 18 June 2020.
All research outputs
#6,929,597
of 23,206,358 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Reviews
#1,245
of 2,017 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#140,906
of 381,406 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Reviews
#52
of 68 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,206,358 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,017 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 37th percentile – i.e., 37% 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 381,406 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 62% of its contemporaries.
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 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.