↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Methods to increase response to postal and electronic questionnaires

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2009
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
58 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
1110 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
961 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Methods to increase response to postal and electronic questionnaires
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2009
DOI 10.1002/14651858.mr000008.pub4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Philip James Edwards, Ian Roberts, Mike J Clarke, Carolyn DiGuiseppi, Reinhard Wentz, Irene Kwan, Rachel Cooper, Lambert M Felix, Sarah Pratap

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 58 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 961 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 13 1%
Spain 4 <1%
Brazil 4 <1%
United States 3 <1%
Canada 3 <1%
Germany 2 <1%
Netherlands 2 <1%
Denmark 2 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Other 5 <1%
Unknown 922 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 168 17%
Student > Master 157 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 156 16%
Student > Bachelor 71 7%
Other 51 5%
Other 218 23%
Unknown 140 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 321 33%
Psychology 99 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 95 10%
Social Sciences 89 9%
Business, Management and Accounting 26 3%
Other 136 14%
Unknown 195 20%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 48. 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 29 March 2022.
All research outputs
#707,431
of 22,155,376 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#1,492
of 12,196 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#7,335
of 207,263 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#23
of 199 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,155,376 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,196 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 29.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 207,263 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 199 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.