↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Handsearching versus electronic searching to identify reports of randomized trials

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2007
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 (92nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
policy
2 policy sources
twitter
5 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
154 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
168 Mendeley
citeulike
8 CiteULike
connotea
1 Connotea
Title
Handsearching versus electronic searching to identify reports of randomized trials
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2007
DOI 10.1002/14651858.mr000001.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sally Hopewell, Mike J Clarke, Carol Lefebvre, Roberta W Scherer

Abstract

Systematic reviewers need to decide how best to reduce bias in identifying studies for their review. Even when journals are indexed in electronic databases, it can still be difficult to identify all relevant studies reported in these journals. Over 1700 journals have been or are being handsearched within The Cochrane Collaboration to identify reports of controlled trials in order to help address these problems.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 168 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 5 3%
Canada 4 2%
United States 2 1%
Spain 2 1%
Mexico 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Other 3 2%
Unknown 147 88%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 39 23%
Librarian 24 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 13%
Researcher 21 13%
Student > Bachelor 15 9%
Other 32 19%
Unknown 15 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 77 46%
Nursing and Health Professions 22 13%
Psychology 9 5%
Social Sciences 9 5%
Computer Science 6 4%
Other 24 14%
Unknown 21 13%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. 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 26 August 2020.
All research outputs
#1,522,864
of 18,960,910 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#3,690
of 11,901 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#8,301
of 113,911 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#16
of 65 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 18,960,910 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,901 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 26.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% 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 113,911 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 65 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.