The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 30 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
| Title |
Repeated use of pre‐ and postcoital hormonal contraception for prevention of pregnancy
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, September 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd007595.pub3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Vera Halpern, Elizabeth G Raymond, Laureen M Lopez |
| Abstract |
Repeated use of postcoital hormonal contraception is not currently recommended due to the higher risk of side effects and lower contraceptive effectiveness compared to other modern methods of contraception. However, emerging evidence indicates renewed interest in a regular coitally-dependent method of oral contraception. We evaluated the existing data on safety and effectiveness of pericoital use of levonorgestrel and other hormonal drugs to prevent pregnancy. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 3 | 10% |
| Chile | 1 | 3% |
| Spain | 1 | 3% |
| United States | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 24 | 80% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 25 | 83% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 4 | 13% |
| Scientists | 1 | 3% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 177 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Portugal | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 175 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 25 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 21 | 12% |
| Researcher | 19 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 6% |
| Other | 9 | 5% |
| Other | 24 | 14% |
| Unknown | 68 | 38% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 54 | 31% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 18 | 10% |
| Social Sciences | 8 | 5% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 5 | 3% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 3% |
| Other | 14 | 8% |
| Unknown | 73 | 41% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 40. 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 15 March 2023.
All research outputs
#1,084,539
of 26,317,969 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#2,038
of 13,211 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#11,009
of 264,075 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#33
of 221 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,317,969 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,211 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 264,075 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 95% 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 done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.