↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Skin patch and vaginal ring versus combined oral contraceptives for contraception

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
74 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
315 Mendeley
Title
Skin patch and vaginal ring versus combined oral contraceptives for contraception
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2013
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd003552.pub4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Laureen M Lopez, David A Grimes, Maria F Gallo, Laurie L Stockton, Kenneth F Schulz

Abstract

The delivery of combination contraceptive steroids from a transdermal contraceptive patch or a contraceptive vaginal ring offers potential advantages over the traditional oral route. The transdermal patch and vaginal ring could require a lower dose due to increased bioavailability and improved user compliance.

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 315 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Colombia 1 <1%
Unknown 312 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 50 16%
Student > Bachelor 39 12%
Researcher 31 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 28 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 4%
Other 42 13%
Unknown 113 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 100 32%
Psychology 21 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 15 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 15 5%
Social Sciences 10 3%
Other 36 11%
Unknown 118 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 29 June 2022.
All research outputs
#5,430,669
of 25,461,852 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#7,435
of 12,090 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#43,754
of 204,412 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#154
of 265 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,461,852 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 78th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,090 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 38.2. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% 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 204,412 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 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 265 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.