↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Non-penetrating filtration surgery versus trabeculectomy for open-angle glaucoma

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, February 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
3 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
87 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
181 Mendeley
Title
Non-penetrating filtration surgery versus trabeculectomy for open-angle glaucoma
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, February 2014
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd007059.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mohamed A Eldaly, Catey Bunce, Ola Z ElSheikha, Richard Wormald

Abstract

Glaucoma is the second commonest cause of blindness worldwide. Non-penetrating glaucoma surgeries have been developed as a safer and more acceptable surgical intervention to patients compared to conventional procedures.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 181 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 179 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 22 12%
Student > Master 21 12%
Other 18 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 10%
Researcher 15 8%
Other 39 22%
Unknown 48 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 82 45%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 6 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 3%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 4 2%
Other 18 10%
Unknown 54 30%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 31 January 2020.
All research outputs
#6,364,873
of 23,485,953 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#8,266
of 12,706 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#82,168
of 340,363 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#167
of 239 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,485,953 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,706 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 34th percentile – i.e., 34% 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 340,363 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 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 239 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.