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 |
An exploration of how developers use qualitative evidence: content analysis and critical appraisal of guidelines
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Research Methodology, June 2020
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12874-020-01041-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yun-Yun Wang, Dan-Dan Liang, Cui Lu, Yue-Xian Shi, Jing Zhang, Yue Cao, Cheng Fang, Di Huang, Ying-Hui Jin |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 2 | 40% |
| United States | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 2 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 60% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 20% |
| Scientists | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 39 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 39 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 5 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 5 | 13% |
| Unknown | 16 | 41% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 11 | 28% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 18% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 5% |
| Linguistics | 1 | 3% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 2 | 5% |
| Unknown | 15 | 38% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 07 June 2021.
All research outputs
#13,162,975
of 23,215,490 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#1,213
of 2,051 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#187,498
of 399,171 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#63
of 85 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,215,490 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,051 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.3. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% 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 399,171 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 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 85 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.