↓ Skip to main content

A worked example of "best fit" framework synthesis: A systematic review of views concerning the taking of some potential chemopreventive agents

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

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
120 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
218 Mendeley
Title
A worked example of "best fit" framework synthesis: A systematic review of views concerning the taking of some potential chemopreventive agents
Published in
BMC Medical Research Methodology, March 2011
DOI 10.1186/1471-2288-11-29
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christopher Carroll, Andrew Booth, Katy Cooper

Abstract

A variety of different approaches to the synthesis of qualitative data are advocated in the literature. The aim of this paper is to describe the application of a pragmatic method of qualitative evidence synthesis and the lessons learned from adopting this "best fit" framework synthesis approach.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 218 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 5 2%
Brazil 2 <1%
Australia 2 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 205 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 51 23%
Researcher 43 20%
Student > Master 41 19%
Student > Doctoral Student 14 6%
Other 11 5%
Other 39 18%
Unknown 19 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 60 28%
Social Sciences 49 22%
Nursing and Health Professions 19 9%
Psychology 18 8%
Business, Management and Accounting 7 3%
Other 35 16%
Unknown 30 14%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 01 December 2014.
All research outputs
#3,126,474
of 4,570,588 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#459
of 556 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#98,305
of 147,059 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#15
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 4,570,588 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 556 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% 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 147,059 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.