↓ Skip to main content

Registration of noncommercial randomised clinical trials: the feasibility of using trial registries to monitor the number of trials

Overview of attention for article published in Trials, August 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
11 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
Registration of noncommercial randomised clinical trials: the feasibility of using trial registries to monitor the number of trials
Published in
Trials, August 2012
DOI 10.1186/1745-6215-13-140
Pubmed ID
Authors

James Raftery, Eleanor Fairbank, Lisa Douet, Louise Dent, Alison Price, Ruairidh Milne, Tom Walley

Abstract

A 2003 survey suggested the number of noncommercial trials in the UK was declining. Formation of the NIHR in 2006 and increased research spending by the Department of Health may have increased the number of noncommercial trials but no data are available.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 11 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 9%
Unknown 10 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 3 27%
Other 2 18%
Student > Postgraduate 2 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 9%
Student > Bachelor 1 9%
Other 2 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 4 36%
Computer Science 2 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 9%
Social Sciences 1 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 9%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 2 18%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 04 November 2012.
All research outputs
#5,423,537
of 21,238,480 outputs
Outputs from Trials
#1,988
of 5,408 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#36,529
of 147,685 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Trials
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,238,480 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,408 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% 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 147,685 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 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them