| Title |
Blinded versus unblinded assessments of risk of bias in studies included in a systematic review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, September 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.mr000025.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kate Morissette, Andrea C Tricco, Tanya Horsley, Maggie H Chen, David Moher |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 4 | 36% |
| Unknown | 7 | 64% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 11 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 83 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 1 | 1% |
| Australia | 1 | 1% |
| Brazil | 1 | 1% |
| Canada | 1 | 1% |
| New Zealand | 1 | 1% |
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 77 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 16 | 19% |
| Researcher | 13 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 6 | 7% |
| Other | 16 | 19% |
| Unknown | 15 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 34 | 41% |
| Social Sciences | 6 | 7% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 6% |
| Psychology | 5 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 12 | 14% |
| Unknown | 19 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 22 July 2020.
All research outputs
#2,451,369
of 24,884,310 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#5,061
of 12,995 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#11,750
of 129,922 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#28
of 110 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,884,310 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,995 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% 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 129,922 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 110 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.