↓ Skip to main content

Michigan Publishing

Article Metrics

Odds Ratios—Current Best Practice and Use

Overview of attention for article published in JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association, July 2018
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 (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (97th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
827 tweeters
facebook
5 Facebook pages
googleplus
2 Google+ users
f1000
1 research highlight platform

Readers on

mendeley
42 Mendeley
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

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 827 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 42 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 42 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 10 24%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 14%
Student > Postgraduate 4 10%
Researcher 4 10%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 10%
Other 14 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 24 57%
Unspecified 6 14%
Social Sciences 3 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 5%
Computer Science 2 5%
Other 5 12%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 548. 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 18 August 2018.
All research outputs
#10,025
of 11,628,211 outputs
Outputs from JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association
#290
of 23,641 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#540
of 227,173 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association
#7
of 342 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,628,211 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 23,641 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 40.8. 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 227,173 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 342 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 97% of its contemporaries.