↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Peer review for improving the quality of grant applications

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2007
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 (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
4 news outlets
blogs
4 blogs
twitter
10 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
85 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
92 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
Title
Peer review for improving the quality of grant applications
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2007
DOI 10.1002/14651858.mr000003.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Vittorio Demicheli, Carlo Di Pietrantonj

Abstract

Grant giving relies heavily on peer review for the assessment of the quality of proposals but the evidence of effects of these procedures is scarce.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 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 92 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 3%
Spain 2 2%
Germany 1 1%
United Kingdom 1 1%
Netherlands 1 1%
Sweden 1 1%
Belgium 1 1%
Unknown 82 89%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 20 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 11%
Student > Master 10 11%
Other 9 10%
Professor > Associate Professor 7 8%
Other 20 22%
Unknown 16 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 22 24%
Social Sciences 16 17%
Computer Science 8 9%
Psychology 7 8%
Engineering 4 4%
Other 12 13%
Unknown 23 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 60. 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 2023.
All research outputs
#717,251
of 25,457,858 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#1,336
of 11,842 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,165
of 87,943 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#6
of 61 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 97th 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 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 87,943 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 61 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 90% of its contemporaries.