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 |
Some reflections on the use of inappropriate comparators in CEA
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation, August 2020
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12962-020-00226-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
José Antonio Sacristán, José-María Abellán-Perpiñán, Tatiana Dilla, Javier Soto, Juan Oliva |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 6 | 46% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 6 | 46% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 11 | 85% |
| Scientists | 2 | 15% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 26 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 5 | 19% |
| Researcher | 4 | 15% |
| Other | 2 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 10 | 38% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 7 | 27% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 3 | 12% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 4% |
| Chemical Engineering | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 2 | 8% |
| Unknown | 10 | 38% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 21 January 2022.
All research outputs
#4,131,446
of 22,957,478 outputs
Outputs from Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation
#147
of 430 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#101,728
of 398,054 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation
#7
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,957,478 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 430 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% 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 398,054 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 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.