↓ Skip to main content

Meta-analyses and Forest plots using a microsoft excel spreadsheet: step-by-step guide focusing on descriptive data analysis

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Research Notes, January 2012
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

twitter
19 tweeters
peer_reviews
1 peer review site
facebook
1 Facebook page
q&a
2 Q&A threads

Citations

dimensions_citation
295 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
473 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
Title
Meta-analyses and Forest plots using a microsoft excel spreadsheet: step-by-step guide focusing on descriptive data analysis
Published in
BMC Research Notes, January 2012
DOI 10.1186/1756-0500-5-52
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jeruza L Neyeloff, Sandra C Fuchs, Leila B Moreira

Abstract

Meta-analyses are necessary to synthesize data obtained from primary research, and in many situations reviews of observational studies are the only available alternative. General purpose statistical packages can meta-analyze data, but usually require external macros or coding. Commercial specialist software is available, but may be expensive and focused in a particular type of primary data. Most available softwares have limitations in dealing with descriptive data, and the graphical display of summary statistics such as incidence and prevalence is unsatisfactory. Analyses can be conducted using Microsoft Excel, but there was no previous guide available.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 19 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 473 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 8 2%
United Kingdom 6 1%
Canada 5 1%
Denmark 5 1%
Brazil 4 <1%
Japan 2 <1%
Australia 2 <1%
Spain 2 <1%
South Africa 2 <1%
Other 9 2%
Unknown 428 90%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 94 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 78 16%
Student > Master 74 16%
Student > Bachelor 39 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 34 7%
Other 154 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 150 32%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 67 14%
Unspecified 62 13%
Psychology 45 10%
Social Sciences 23 5%
Other 126 27%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. 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 27 August 2019.
All research outputs
#956,775
of 13,460,112 outputs
Outputs from BMC Research Notes
#128
of 3,050 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#8,677
of 126,313 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Research Notes
#1
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,460,112 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,050 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 126,313 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 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them