The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
Title |
t-tests, non-parametric tests, and large studies—a paradox of statistical practice?
|
---|---|
Published in |
BMC Medical Research Methodology, June 2012
|
DOI | 10.1186/1471-2288-12-78 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Morten W Fagerland |
Abstract |
During the last 30 years, the median sample size of research studies published in high-impact medical journals has increased manyfold, while the use of non-parametric tests has increased at the expense of t-tests. This paper explores this paradoxical practice and illustrates its consequences. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United States | 2 | 17% |
United Kingdom | 1 | 8% |
Norway | 1 | 8% |
Unknown | 8 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 6 | 50% |
Scientists | 5 | 42% |
Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 8% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 426 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Norway | 2 | <1% |
United Kingdom | 2 | <1% |
Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
Czechia | 1 | <1% |
Canada | 1 | <1% |
Russia | 1 | <1% |
United States | 1 | <1% |
Unknown | 417 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Master | 64 | 15% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 63 | 15% |
Researcher | 54 | 13% |
Student > Bachelor | 42 | 10% |
Student > Doctoral Student | 22 | 5% |
Other | 59 | 14% |
Unknown | 122 | 29% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 48 | 11% |
Psychology | 29 | 7% |
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 27 | 6% |
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 25 | 6% |
Computer Science | 22 | 5% |
Other | 129 | 30% |
Unknown | 146 | 34% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 13 June 2024.
All research outputs
#2,587,158
of 26,132,653 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#376
of 2,354 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,700
of 182,307 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#3
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,132,653 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,354 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 182,307 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 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.