The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 59 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.
| Title |
Healthcare stakeholders’ perceptions and experiences of factors affecting the implementation of critical care telemedicine (CCT): qualitative evidence synthesis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, February 2021
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd012876.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Andreas Xyrichis, Katerina Iliopoulou, Nicola J Mackintosh, Suzanne Bench, Marius Terblanche, Julia Philippou, Jane Sandall |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 11 | 19% |
| Austria | 1 | 2% |
| Brazil | 1 | 2% |
| South Africa | 1 | 2% |
| Australia | 1 | 2% |
| Canada | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 43 | 73% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 33 | 56% |
| Scientists | 16 | 27% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 6 | 10% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 4 | 7% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 356 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 356 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 32 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 28 | 8% |
| Researcher | 26 | 7% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 20 | 6% |
| Other | 18 | 5% |
| Other | 59 | 17% |
| Unknown | 173 | 49% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 47 | 13% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 46 | 13% |
| Unspecified | 13 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 11 | 3% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 8 | 2% |
| Other | 46 | 13% |
| Unknown | 185 | 52% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 42. 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 27 March 2022.
All research outputs
#1,046,303
of 26,338,415 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#1,965
of 13,212 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#29,004
of 460,184 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#28
of 181 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,338,415 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,212 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% 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 460,184 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 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 181 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.