↓ Skip to main content

Identifying observational studies of surgical interventions in MEDLINE and EMBASE

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Research Methodology, August 2006
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter
peer_reviews
1 peer review site

Citations

dimensions_citation
32 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
34 Mendeley
connotea
1 Connotea
Title
Identifying observational studies of surgical interventions in MEDLINE and EMBASE
Published in
BMC Medical Research Methodology, August 2006
DOI 10.1186/1471-2288-6-41
Pubmed ID
Authors

Cynthia Fraser, Alison Murray, Jennifer Burr

Abstract

Health technology assessments of surgical interventions frequently require the inclusion of non-randomised evidence. Literature search strategies employed to identify this evidence often exclude a methodological component because of uncertainty surrounding the use of appropriate search terms. This can result in the retrieval of a large number of irrelevant records. Methodological filters would help to minimise this, making literature searching more efficient.

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 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 2 6%
United States 2 6%
United Kingdom 1 3%
Unknown 29 85%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Librarian 11 32%
Researcher 8 24%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 9%
Professor 3 9%
Other 5 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 22 65%
Computer Science 3 9%
Social Sciences 3 9%
Psychology 3 9%
Unspecified 2 6%
Other 1 3%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 11 December 2014.
All research outputs
#7,459,083
of 12,373,180 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#732
of 1,095 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#129,733
of 275,317 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#58
of 74 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,373,180 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% 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 275,317 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 74 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.