↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Strategies to improve recruitment to randomised controlled trials

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2010
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 (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets
blogs
2 blogs
twitter
12 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
323 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
346 Mendeley
citeulike
3 CiteULike
Title
Strategies to improve recruitment to randomised controlled trials
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2010
DOI 10.1002/14651858.mr000013.pub5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Shaun Treweek, Elizabeth Mitchell, Marie Pitkethly, Jonathan Cook, Monica Kjeldstrøm, Marit Johansen, Taina K Taskila, Frank Sullivan, Sue Wilson, Catherine Jackson, Ritu Jones, Pauline Lockhart

Abstract

Recruiting participants to trials can be extremely difficult. Identifying strategies that improve trial recruitment would benefit both trialists and health research.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 346 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 5 1%
Australia 4 1%
Germany 3 <1%
United States 3 <1%
Canada 2 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Ireland 1 <1%
New Zealand 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Other 2 <1%
Unknown 323 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 64 18%
Researcher 61 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 58 17%
Other 22 6%
Student > Postgraduate 22 6%
Other 83 24%
Unknown 36 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 132 38%
Psychology 33 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 32 9%
Social Sciences 26 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 3%
Other 51 15%
Unknown 60 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 45. 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 21 June 2017.
All research outputs
#926,140
of 25,457,858 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#1,811
of 11,842 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,694
of 102,892 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#6
of 79 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,858 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 11,842 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 38.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% 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 102,892 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 79 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 92% of its contemporaries.