↓ Skip to main content

A systematic review of how homeopathy is represented in conventional and CAM peer reviewed journals

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine, June 2005
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 (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
14 tweeters
facebook
2 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
57 Mendeley
Title
A systematic review of how homeopathy is represented in conventional and CAM peer reviewed journals
Published in
BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine, June 2005
DOI 10.1186/1472-6882-5-12
Pubmed ID
Authors

Timothy Caulfield, Suzanne DeBow

Abstract

Growing popularity of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) in the public sector is reflected in the scientific community by an increased number of research articles assessing its therapeutic effects. Some suggest that publication biases occur in mainstream medicine, and may also occur in CAM. Homeopathy is one of the most widespread and most controversial forms of CAM. The purpose of this study was to compare the representation of homeopathic clinical trials published in traditional science and CAM journals.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 tweeters 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 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 5 9%
Nigeria 4 7%
Italy 1 2%
Belgium 1 2%
Canada 1 2%
Unknown 45 79%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 15 26%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 16%
Researcher 8 14%
Student > Master 6 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 9%
Other 14 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 30%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 16%
Psychology 6 11%
Social Sciences 5 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 5%
Other 17 30%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 21. 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 04 November 2018.
All research outputs
#770,945
of 13,481,459 outputs
Outputs from BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine
#150
of 2,748 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,127
of 206,623 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine
#12
of 123 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,481,459 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,748 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 206,623 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 123 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.