↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Conflicts of interest in clinical guidelines, advisory committee reports, opinion pieces, and narrative reviews: associations with recommendations

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2020
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 (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
96 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
21 Mendeley
Title
Conflicts of interest in clinical guidelines, advisory committee reports, opinion pieces, and narrative reviews: associations with recommendations
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2020
DOI 10.1002/14651858.mr000040.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Camilla Hansen Nejstgaard, Lisa Bero, Asbjørn Hróbjartsson, Anders W Jørgensen, Karsten Juhl Jørgensen, Mary Le, Andreas Lundh

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 96 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 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 21 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 24%
Researcher 4 19%
Other 3 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 5%
Other 2 10%
Unknown 3 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 38%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 14%
Philosophy 1 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 5%
Other 4 19%
Unknown 3 14%

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 25 January 2021.
All research outputs
#461,491
of 18,707,984 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#997
of 11,847 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#18,046
of 436,395 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#8
of 47 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 18,707,984 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 11,847 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 26.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 436,395 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 47 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.