| Title |
Matched case-control studies: a review of reported statistical methodology
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Epidemiology, April 2012
|
| DOI | 10.2147/clep.s30816 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Daniel J Niven, Luc R Berthiaume, Gordon H Fick, Kevin B Laupland |
| Abstract |
Case-control studies are a common and efficient means of studying rare diseases or illnesses with long latency periods. Matching of cases and controls is frequently employed to control the effects of known potential confounding variables. The analysis of matched data requires specific statistical methods. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 271 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| India | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Austria | 1 | <1% |
| Iran, Islamic Republic of | 1 | <1% |
| Peru | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 259 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 62 | 23% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 50 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 49 | 18% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 16 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 15 | 6% |
| Other | 43 | 16% |
| Unknown | 36 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 113 | 42% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 19 | 7% |
| Psychology | 12 | 4% |
| Mathematics | 9 | 3% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 3% |
| Other | 60 | 22% |
| Unknown | 50 | 18% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 21 April 2015.
All research outputs
#7,960,512
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Epidemiology
#304
of 793 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#51,945
of 173,053 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Epidemiology
#3
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 793 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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 173,053 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 6 of them.