| Title |
Endovascular coiling versus neurosurgical clipping for patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2005
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd003085.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Irene van der Schaaf, Ale Algra, Marieke Wermer, Andrew Molyneux, Mike J Clarke, Jan van Gijn, Gabriel JE Rinkel |
| Abstract |
Patients who have had an aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage (SAH) are at very high risk of rebleeding if the aneurysm is not treated. The standard treatment for several decades has been surgical clipping of the neck of the aneurysm. In recent years, an alternative, the introduction of detachable coils to occlude the aneurysm, has become more common. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 53 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 8 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 9% |
| Other | 10 | 19% |
| Unknown | 11 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 27 | 51% |
| Neuroscience | 3 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 4% |
| Engineering | 2 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 2 | 4% |
| Unknown | 16 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 24 January 2016.
All research outputs
#6,256,817
of 22,703,044 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#8,080
of 12,310 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#18,065
of 58,926 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#33
of 53 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,703,044 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,310 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 30.3. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% 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 58,926 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 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 53 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.