↓ Skip to main content

Developing optimal search strategies for detecting clinically sound prognostic studies in MEDLINE: an analytic survey

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medicine, June 2004
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 (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

1 blog
2 policy sources
1 peer review site


246 Dimensions

Readers on

107 Mendeley
1 CiteULike
3 Connotea
Developing optimal search strategies for detecting clinically sound prognostic studies in MEDLINE: an analytic survey
Published in
BMC Medicine, June 2004
DOI 10.1186/1741-7015-2-23
Pubmed ID

Nancy L Wilczynski, R Brian Haynes, the Hedges Team


Clinical end users of MEDLINE have a difficult time retrieving articles that are both scientifically sound and directly relevant to clinical practice. Search filters have been developed to assist end users in increasing the success of their searches. Many filters have been developed for the literature on therapy and reviews but little has been done in the area of prognosis. The objective of this study is to determine how well various methodologic textwords, Medical Subject Headings, and their Boolean combinations retrieve methodologically sound literature on the prognosis of health disorders in MEDLINE.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 107 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 4 4%
Spain 3 3%
Canada 3 3%
Switzerland 2 2%
Portugal 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Unknown 93 87%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 20 19%
Librarian 13 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 12%
Professor 10 9%
Student > Postgraduate 9 8%
Other 29 27%
Unknown 13 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 50 47%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 7%
Computer Science 5 5%
Psychology 5 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 4%
Other 14 13%
Unknown 21 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 25 August 2021.
All research outputs
of 22,774,233 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medicine
of 3,419 outputs
Outputs of similar age
of 57,630 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medicine
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,774,233 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 3,419 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 43.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% 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 57,630 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.