↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Screening for lung cancer

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

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
policy
1 policy source
twitter
65 X users
facebook
5 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
155 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
312 Mendeley
Title
Screening for lung cancer
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, June 2013
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd001991.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Renée Manser, Anne Lethaby, Louis B Irving, Christine Stone, Graham Byrnes, Michael J Abramson, Don Campbell

Abstract

This is an updated version of the original review published in The Cochrane Library in 1999 and updated in 2004 and 2010. Population-based screening for lung cancer has not been adopted in the majority of countries. However it is not clear whether sputum examinations, chest radiography or newer methods such as computed tomography (CT) are effective in reducing mortality from lung cancer.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 65 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 312 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
India 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 306 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 47 15%
Student > Master 42 13%
Researcher 31 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 30 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 26 8%
Other 59 19%
Unknown 77 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 136 44%
Nursing and Health Professions 20 6%
Psychology 14 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 11 4%
Computer Science 9 3%
Other 34 11%
Unknown 88 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 57. 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 22 August 2023.
All research outputs
#744,892
of 25,382,035 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#1,400
of 12,596 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,652
of 208,829 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#31
of 273 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,035 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,596 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 36.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 208,829 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 273 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.