| Title |
Protocol - realist and meta-narrative evidence synthesis: Evolving Standards (RAMESES)
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Research Methodology, August 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2288-11-115 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Trisha Greenhalgh, Geoff Wong, Gill Westhorp, Ray Pawson |
| Abstract |
There is growing interest in theory-driven, qualitative and mixed-method approaches to systematic review as an alternative to (or to extend and supplement) conventional Cochrane-style reviews. These approaches offer the potential to expand the knowledge base in policy-relevant areas - for example by explaining the success, failure or mixed fortunes of complex interventions. However, the quality of such reviews can be difficult to assess. This study aims to produce methodological guidance, publication standards and training resources for those seeking to use the realist and/or meta-narrative approach to systematic review. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 5 | 63% |
| Unknown | 3 | 38% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 6 | 75% |
| Scientists | 1 | 13% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 13% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 520 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 9 | 2% |
| Canada | 6 | 1% |
| United States | 4 | <1% |
| Germany | 3 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 2 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Sweden | 1 | <1% |
| Italy | 1 | <1% |
| India | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 6 | 1% |
| Unknown | 486 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 116 | 22% |
| Researcher | 89 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 64 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 28 | 5% |
| Professor | 28 | 5% |
| Other | 123 | 24% |
| Unknown | 72 | 14% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 139 | 27% |
| Social Sciences | 108 | 21% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 57 | 11% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 24 | 5% |
| Psychology | 17 | 3% |
| Other | 78 | 15% |
| Unknown | 97 | 19% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 07 November 2022.
All research outputs
#3,042,883
of 25,930,027 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#449
of 2,339 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#13,867
of 123,631 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#2
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,930,027 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,339 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.5. 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 123,631 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.