| Title |
Electromagnetic-guided versus endoscopic-guided postpyloric placement of nasoenteral feeding tubes
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2022
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd013865.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jun Watanabe, Eiichi Kakehi, Masaru Okamoto, Shizukiyo Ishikawa, Yuki Kataoka |
Twitter Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 28 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 2 | 7% |
| Researcher | 1 | 4% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 1 | 4% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 23 | 82% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 25 | 89% |
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 03 October 2022.
All research outputs
#15,798,439
of 23,466,057 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#11,181
of 12,702 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#241,906
of 442,692 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#128
of 132 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,466,057 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,702 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 33.0. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% 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 442,692 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 132 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.