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 |
How do 66 European institutional review boards approve one protocol for an international prospective observational study on traumatic brain injury? Experiences from the CENTER-TBI study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Ethics, May 2020
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12910-020-00480-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Marjolein Timmers, Jeroen T. J. M. van Dijck, Roel P. J. van Wijk, Valerie Legrand, Ernest van Veen, Andrew I. R. Maas, David K. Menon, Giuseppe Citerio, Nino Stocchetti, Erwin J. O. Kompanje |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 21 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 | 3 | 14% |
| France | 2 | 10% |
| Spain | 1 | 5% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 5% |
| Finland | 1 | 5% |
| United States | 1 | 5% |
| Germany | 1 | 5% |
| Belgium | 1 | 5% |
| New Zealand | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 2 | 10% |
| Unknown | 7 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 13 | 62% |
| Scientists | 5 | 24% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 14% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 34 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 6 | 18% |
| Other | 4 | 12% |
| Professor | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 6 | 18% |
| Unknown | 10 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 35% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 6% |
| Psychology | 2 | 6% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 2 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 3 | 9% |
| Unknown | 12 | 35% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. 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 2022.
All research outputs
#2,010,677
of 26,017,215 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Ethics
#181
of 1,121 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#55,065
of 423,524 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Ethics
#5
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,017,215 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,121 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% 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 423,524 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 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.