↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Remote ischaemic preconditioning versus no remote ischaemic preconditioning for vascular and endovascular surgical procedures

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2023
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (83rd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
73 Mendeley
Title
Remote ischaemic preconditioning versus no remote ischaemic preconditioning for vascular and endovascular surgical procedures
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2023
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd008472.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Fuxiang Liang, Shidong Liu, Guangzu Liu, Hongxu Liu, Qi Wang, Bing Song, Liang Yao

Timeline
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 73 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 73 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 10 14%
Other 6 8%
Student > Bachelor 6 8%
Researcher 5 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 5%
Other 13 18%
Unknown 29 40%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 29%
Unspecified 10 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 10%
Social Sciences 2 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Other 2 3%
Unknown 29 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 12 April 2023.
All research outputs
#3,938,645
of 26,180,771 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#6,498
of 13,191 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#80,282
of 484,320 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#71
of 115 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,180,771 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,191 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% 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 484,320 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 115 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.