↓ Skip to main content

Comparing methods to estimate treatment effects on a continuous outcome in multicentre randomized controlled trials: A simulation study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Research Methodology, February 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet

Citations

dimensions_citation
35 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
69 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Comparing methods to estimate treatment effects on a continuous outcome in multicentre randomized controlled trials: A simulation study
Published in
BMC Medical Research Methodology, February 2011
DOI 10.1186/1471-2288-11-21
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rong Chu, Lehana Thabane, Jinhui Ma, Anne Holbrook, Eleanor Pullenayegum, Philip James Devereaux

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 69 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 4%
United Kingdom 1 1%
Unknown 65 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 26%
Researcher 17 25%
Student > Master 8 12%
Professor 5 7%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 6%
Other 13 19%
Unknown 4 6%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 22 32%
Psychology 7 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 10%
Social Sciences 5 7%
Mathematics 3 4%
Other 18 26%
Unknown 7 10%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 18 September 2017.
All research outputs
#1,762,922
of 11,788,586 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#267
of 1,000 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#59,745
of 267,355 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#6
of 25 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,788,586 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,000 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% 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 267,355 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 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 25 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.