| Title |
Visual or visual-tactile examination to detect and inform the diagnosis of enamel caries
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, June 2021
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd014546 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Richard Macey, Tanya Walsh, Philip Riley, Anne-Marie Glenny, Helen V Worthington, Lucy O'Malley, Janet E Clarkson, David Ricketts |
Twitter Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 26 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 5 | 19% |
| Côte d'Ivoire | 1 | 4% |
| Indonesia | 1 | 4% |
| Peru | 1 | 4% |
| Brazil | 1 | 4% |
| Greece | 1 | 4% |
| Bahrain | 1 | 4% |
| Malaysia | 1 | 4% |
| Japan | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 4 | 15% |
| Unknown | 9 | 35% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 17 | 65% |
| Scientists | 5 | 19% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 4 | 15% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 87 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 87 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 12 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 7% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 6 | 7% |
| Other | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 12 | 14% |
| Unknown | 39 | 45% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 28 | 32% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 3% |
| Engineering | 3 | 3% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 5 | 6% |
| Unknown | 42 | 48% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 29. 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 11 August 2022.
All research outputs
#1,248,012
of 24,254,113 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#2,768
of 12,876 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#32,160
of 435,696 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#44
of 168 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,254,113 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,876 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 33.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% 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 435,696 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 168 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.