↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Early compared with delayed oral fluids and food after caesarean section

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2002
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source

Citations

dimensions_citation
77 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
106 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Early compared with delayed oral fluids and food after caesarean section
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2002
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd003516
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lindeka Mangesi, G Justus Hofmeyr

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 106 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Turkey 2 2%
Rwanda 1 <1%
Ireland 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 101 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 23 22%
Researcher 16 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 13%
Student > Postgraduate 11 10%
Student > Bachelor 8 8%
Other 21 20%
Unknown 13 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 57 54%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 7%
Psychology 6 6%
Social Sciences 5 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 3%
Other 10 9%
Unknown 18 17%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 06 January 2020.
All research outputs
#5,604,920
of 17,351,915 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#8,107
of 11,661 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#60,661
of 195,072 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#148
of 200 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,351,915 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,661 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 25.0. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% 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 195,072 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 60% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 200 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.