| Title |
Open Mesh versus non-Mesh for groin hernia repair
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2001
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd002197 |
| Authors |
Neil Scott, Peter M.N.Y.H Go, Paul Graham, Kirsty McCormack, Sue J Ross, Adrian M Grant |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 50% |
| Sweden | 1 | 25% |
| Australia | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 123 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Portugal | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 122 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 15 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 15 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 15 | 12% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 10 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 9 | 7% |
| Other | 29 | 24% |
| Unknown | 30 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 64 | 52% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 4% |
| Computer Science | 3 | 2% |
| Sports and Recreations | 3 | 2% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 11 | 9% |
| Unknown | 35 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 27 November 2017.
All research outputs
#5,586,120
of 22,955,959 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#7,448
of 12,334 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,735
of 38,534 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#11
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,955,959 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,334 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 30.6. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% 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 38,534 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 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.