| Title |
Factors that impact on recruitment to randomised trials in health care: a qualitative evidence synthesis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2020
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.mr000045.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Catherine Houghton, Maura Dowling, Pauline Meskell, Andrew Hunter, Heidi Gardner, Aislinn Conway, Shaun Treweek, Katy Sutcliffe, Jane Noyes, Declan Devane, Jane R Nicholas, Linda M Biesty |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 161 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 46 | 29% |
| Ireland | 12 | 7% |
| Canada | 10 | 6% |
| Australia | 7 | 4% |
| Spain | 4 | 2% |
| Italy | 3 | 2% |
| United States | 3 | 2% |
| Japan | 2 | 1% |
| South Africa | 2 | 1% |
| Other | 13 | 8% |
| Unknown | 59 | 37% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 100 | 62% |
| Scientists | 38 | 24% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 20 | 12% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 3 | 2% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 318 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 318 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 34 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 32 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 27 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 21 | 7% |
| Unspecified | 17 | 5% |
| Other | 56 | 18% |
| Unknown | 131 | 41% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 46 | 14% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 32 | 10% |
| Unspecified | 18 | 6% |
| Psychology | 15 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 14 | 4% |
| Other | 49 | 15% |
| Unknown | 144 | 45% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 123. 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 24 November 2023.
All research outputs
#341,877
of 25,595,500 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#578
of 13,156 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,179
of 436,286 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#17
of 184 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,595,500 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,156 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 436,286 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 184 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.