↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Outcomes of patients who participate in randomized controlled trials compared to similar patients receiving similar interventions who do not participate

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2008
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 (80th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (53rd percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
7 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
131 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
231 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Outcomes of patients who participate in randomized controlled trials compared to similar patients receiving similar interventions who do not participate
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2008
DOI 10.1002/14651858.mr000009.pub4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gunn Elisabeth Vist, Dianne Bryant, Lyndsay Somerville, Trevor Birminghem, Andrew D Oxman

Abstract

Some people believe that patients who take part in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) face risks that they would not face if they opted for non-trial treatment. Others think that trial participation is beneficial and the best way to ensure access to the most up-to-date physicians and treatments. This is an updated version of the original Cochrane review published in Issue 1, 2005.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 231 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 5 2%
United Kingdom 4 2%
South Africa 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 218 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 43 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 32 14%
Researcher 30 13%
Student > Bachelor 25 11%
Other 13 6%
Other 50 22%
Unknown 38 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 114 49%
Nursing and Health Professions 21 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 5%
Psychology 9 4%
Social Sciences 7 3%
Other 21 9%
Unknown 48 21%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 06 September 2022.
All research outputs
#4,256,825
of 22,005,197 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#6,636
of 12,166 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#34,772
of 176,963 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#54
of 114 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,005,197 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,166 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 29.8. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% 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 176,963 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 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 114 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.