↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Vitrification versus slow freezing for women undergoing oocyte cryopreservation

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

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (89th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (58th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
1 tweeter
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
64 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
146 Mendeley
Title
Vitrification versus slow freezing for women undergoing oocyte cryopreservation
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, September 2014
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd010047.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Demián Glujovsky, Barbara Riestra, Carlos Sueldo, Gabriel Fiszbajn, Sjoerd Repping, Florencia Nodar, Sergio Papier, Agustín Ciapponi

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 146 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Mexico 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 144 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 31 21%
Student > Bachelor 28 19%
Researcher 23 16%
Other 13 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 8%
Other 16 11%
Unknown 24 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 52 36%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 21 14%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 12 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 5%
Computer Science 5 3%
Other 18 12%
Unknown 30 21%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 17 December 2019.
All research outputs
#1,633,290
of 16,410,712 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#4,143
of 11,506 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#22,288
of 205,068 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#90
of 221 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 16,410,712 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,506 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 24.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% 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 205,068 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 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 221 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% of its contemporaries.