↓ 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 (92nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
twitter
1 tweeter
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
84 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
168 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 168 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 166 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 33 20%
Student > Bachelor 27 16%
Researcher 25 15%
Other 14 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 7%
Other 18 11%
Unknown 40 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 59 35%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 22 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 12 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 5%
Computer Science 5 3%
Other 17 10%
Unknown 45 27%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. 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 01 December 2020.
All research outputs
#1,582,841
of 22,763,032 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#3,618
of 12,313 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,825
of 238,416 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#63
of 231 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,763,032 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,313 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 30.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% 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 238,416 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 231 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 72% of its contemporaries.