↓ Skip to main content

Comparison of up-front cash cards and checks as incentives for participation in a clinician survey: a study within a trial

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Research Methodology, August 2020
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
15 Mendeley
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.
Title
Comparison of up-front cash cards and checks as incentives for participation in a clinician survey: a study within a trial
Published in
BMC Medical Research Methodology, August 2020
DOI 10.1186/s12874-020-01086-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lydia E. Pace, Yeonsoo S. Lee, Nadine Tung, Jada G. Hamilton, Camila Gabriel, Sahitya C. Raja, Colby Jenkins, Anthony Braswell, Susan M. Domchek, Heather Symecko, Kelsey Spielman, Beth Y. Karlan, Jenny Lester, Daniella Kamara, Jeffrey Levin, Kelly Morgan, Kenneth Offit, Judy Garber, Nancy L. Keating

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 15 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Lecturer 3 20%
Researcher 3 20%
Student > Master 3 20%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 7%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 4 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Business, Management and Accounting 3 20%
Social Sciences 2 13%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 13%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 7%
Environmental Science 1 7%
Other 1 7%
Unknown 5 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 August 2020.
All research outputs
#15,601,869
of 25,501,527 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#1,521
of 2,289 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#231,662
of 427,708 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#38
of 47 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,501,527 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,289 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.6. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% 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 427,708 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 47 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.