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 |
Assessing risk of bias in human environmental epidemiology studies using three tools: different conclusions from different tools
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Systematic Reviews, October 2020
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13643-020-01490-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Stephanie M. Eick, Dana E. Goin, Nicholas Chartres, Juleen Lam, Tracey J. Woodruff |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 6 | 67% |
| Australia | 1 | 11% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 11% |
| Unknown | 1 | 11% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 6 | 67% |
| Scientists | 3 | 33% |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 7 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 13% |
| Researcher | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 5% |
| Lecturer | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 6 | 15% |
| Unknown | 14 | 36% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 18% |
| Environmental Science | 2 | 5% |
| Psychology | 2 | 5% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 3% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 3 | 8% |
| Unknown | 23 | 59% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 17 February 2021.
All research outputs
#2,520,614
of 25,292,378 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Reviews
#423
of 2,217 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#62,479
of 428,962 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Reviews
#11
of 66 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,292,378 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,217 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% 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 428,962 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 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 66 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.