↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Continuous or extended cycle vs. cyclic use of combined hormonal contraceptives for contraception

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2014
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 (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (98th percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
112 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
233 Mendeley
Title
Continuous or extended cycle vs. cyclic use of combined hormonal contraceptives for contraception
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2014
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd004695.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alison Edelman, Elizabeth Micks, Maria F Gallo, Jeffrey T Jensen, David A Grimes

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 32 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 233 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 4 2%
Peru 2 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 225 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 31 13%
Student > Bachelor 30 13%
Researcher 27 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 26 11%
Other 17 7%
Other 48 21%
Unknown 54 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 90 39%
Nursing and Health Professions 17 7%
Psychology 16 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 14 6%
Social Sciences 14 6%
Other 23 10%
Unknown 59 25%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 251. 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 July 2021.
All research outputs
#85,453
of 18,738,748 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#158
of 11,853 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#874
of 202,237 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#3
of 223 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 18,738,748 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,853 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 26.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 202,237 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 223 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.