Cluster randomised trials in the medical literature: two bibliometric surveys
Clicks: 290
ID: 116175
2004
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Popular Article
30.0
/100
290 views
39 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
PopularRanked #26 of 38 articles by views in BMC medical research methodology
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Cluster trials are becoming more frequent and reporting is of higher quality. Perhaps statistician pressure works.
Abstract Quality Issue:
This abstract appears to be incomplete or contains metadata (16 words).
Try re-searching for a better abstract.
| Reference Key |
jm2004bmccluster
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | Bland JM;; |
| Journal | BMC medical research methodology |
| Year | 2004 |
| DOI |
DOI not found
|
| URL | |
| Keywords |
National Center for Biotechnology Information
NCBI
NLM
MEDLINE
humans
pubmed abstract
nih
national institutes of health
national library of medicine
periodicals as topic / standards
bias
pmid:15310402
pmc515302
doi:10.1186/1471-2288-4-21
j martin bland
bibliometrics*
cluster analysis*
periodicals as topic / statistics & numerical data*
randomized controlled trials as topic / methods*
randomized controlled trials as topic / standards
|
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.