| Title |
Odds Ratios—Current Best Practice and Use
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association, July 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1001/jama.2018.6971 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Edward C Norton, Bryan E Dowd, Matthew L Maciejewski |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 1,127 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 States | 318 | 28% |
| United Kingdom | 69 | 6% |
| Canada | 56 | 5% |
| Saudi Arabia | 51 | 5% |
| Spain | 36 | 3% |
| Australia | 29 | 3% |
| Mexico | 26 | 2% |
| Colombia | 20 | 2% |
| France | 16 | 1% |
| Other | 135 | 12% |
| Unknown | 371 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 611 | 54% |
| Scientists | 307 | 27% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 178 | 16% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 29 | 3% |
| Unknown | 2 | <1% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 372 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 372 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 58 | 16% |
| Researcher | 49 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 42 | 11% |
| Other | 39 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 24 | 6% |
| Other | 87 | 23% |
| Unknown | 73 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 115 | 31% |
| Social Sciences | 29 | 8% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 15 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 14 | 4% |
| Psychology | 13 | 3% |
| Other | 77 | 21% |
| Unknown | 109 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 717. 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 06 November 2023.
All research outputs
#28,876
of 25,732,188 outputs
Outputs from JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association
#662
of 36,771 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#565
of 342,325 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association
#11
of 353 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,732,188 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 36,771 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 72.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 342,325 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 353 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 96% of its contemporaries.