↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Bias due to selective inclusion and reporting of outcomes and analyses in systematic reviews of randomised trials of healthcare interventions

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2014
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 (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
twitter
67 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
235 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
309 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
Title
Bias due to selective inclusion and reporting of outcomes and analyses in systematic reviews of randomised trials of healthcare interventions
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2014
DOI 10.1002/14651858.mr000035.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Matthew J Page, Joanne E McKenzie, Jamie Kirkham, Kerry Dwan, Sharon Kramer, Sally Green, Andrew Forbes

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 67 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 309 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 2 <1%
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Chile 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Other 2 <1%
Unknown 296 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 54 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 38 12%
Researcher 34 11%
Other 22 7%
Student > Bachelor 20 6%
Other 71 23%
Unknown 70 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 117 38%
Nursing and Health Professions 30 10%
Psychology 11 4%
Social Sciences 10 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 3%
Other 42 14%
Unknown 90 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 55. 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 13 July 2024.
All research outputs
#811,020
of 26,253,210 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#1,444
of 13,201 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#8,163
of 266,106 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#19
of 229 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,253,210 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 13,201 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 266,106 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 229 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 91% of its contemporaries.