↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Intraperitoneal local anaesthetic instillation versus no intraperitoneal local anaesthetic instillation for laparoscopic cholecystectomy

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

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
99 Mendeley
Title
Intraperitoneal local anaesthetic instillation versus no intraperitoneal local anaesthetic instillation for laparoscopic cholecystectomy
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2021
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd007337.pub4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Duncan Rutherford, Eleanor M Massie, Calum Worsley, Michael Sj Wilson

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 99 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Turkey 1 1%
Unknown 98 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 10 10%
Student > Master 10 10%
Student > Bachelor 9 9%
Researcher 6 6%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 4%
Other 11 11%
Unknown 49 49%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 25%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 8%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 4%
Environmental Science 2 2%
Psychology 2 2%
Other 4 4%
Unknown 54 55%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 October 2021.
All research outputs
#17,350,971
of 25,462,162 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#11,095
of 12,766 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#266,252
of 442,365 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#128
of 131 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,462,162 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,766 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 36.5. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% 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 442,365 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 131 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.