↓ Skip to main content

Internet trials: participant experiences and perspectives

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Research Methodology, October 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (89th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
15 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
58 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Internet trials: participant experiences and perspectives
Published in
BMC Medical Research Methodology, October 2012
DOI 10.1186/1471-2288-12-162
Pubmed ID
Authors

Erin Mathieu, Alexandra Barratt, Stacy M Carter, Gro Jamtvedt

Abstract

Use of the Internet to conduct randomised controlled trials is increasing, and provides potential to increase equity of access to medical research, increase the generalisability of trial results and decrease the costs involved in conducting large scale trials. Several studies have compared response rates, completeness of data, and reliability of surveys using the Internet and traditional methods, but very little is known about participants' attitudes towards Internet-based randomised trials or their experience of participating in an Internet-based trial.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 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 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Germany 1 2%
Switzerland 1 2%
Unknown 55 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 18 31%
Student > Master 10 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 12%
Other 3 5%
Other 7 12%
Unknown 4 7%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 36%
Psychology 9 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 9%
Social Sciences 4 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Other 8 14%
Unknown 9 16%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 15 November 2012.
All research outputs
#1,289,364
of 12,373,180 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#209
of 1,095 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,390
of 138,056 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#11
of 115 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,373,180 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,095 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.5. 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 138,056 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 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 115 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.