↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Hybrid repair versus conventional open repair for aortic arch dissection

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2021
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
97 Mendeley
Title
Hybrid repair versus conventional open repair for aortic arch dissection
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2021
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd012920.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Edel P Kavanagh, Sherif Sultan, Fionnuala Jordan, Ala Elhelali, Declan Devane, Dave Veerasingam, Niamh Hynes

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 97 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 97 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 10%
Other 9 9%
Student > Bachelor 9 9%
Researcher 4 4%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 4%
Other 10 10%
Unknown 51 53%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 28 29%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 7%
Psychology 3 3%
Engineering 2 2%
Sports and Recreations 1 1%
Other 3 3%
Unknown 53 55%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 25 August 2021.
All research outputs
#15,643,658
of 26,245,314 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#10,945
of 13,197 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#213,670
of 447,702 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#133
of 155 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,245,314 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,197 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 34.8. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 447,702 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 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 155 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.