| Title |
Sample size and power considerations for ordinary least squares interrupted time series analysis: a simulation study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Epidemiology, February 2019
|
| DOI | 10.2147/clep.s176723 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Samuel Hawley, M Sanni Ali, Klara Berencsi, Andrew Judge, Daniel Prieto-Alhambra |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 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 | 1 | 9% |
| Japan | 1 | 9% |
| Brazil | 1 | 9% |
| Spain | 1 | 9% |
| Unknown | 7 | 64% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 6 | 55% |
| Scientists | 3 | 27% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 18% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 137 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 137 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 22 | 16% |
| Researcher | 18 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 12 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 11 | 8% |
| Other | 9 | 7% |
| Other | 28 | 20% |
| Unknown | 37 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 29 | 21% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 8 | 6% |
| Mathematics | 7 | 5% |
| Psychology | 6 | 4% |
| Other | 23 | 17% |
| Unknown | 56 | 41% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 22 June 2022.
All research outputs
#4,272,096
of 23,973,980 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Epidemiology
#175
of 754 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#95,435
of 443,656 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Epidemiology
#6
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,973,980 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 754 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% 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 443,656 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.