The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 40 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 |
Negative pressure wound therapy for treating foot wounds in people with diabetes mellitus
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd010318.pub3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Zhenmi Liu, Jo C Dumville, Robert J Hinchliffe, Nicky Cullum, Fran Game, Nikki Stubbs, Michael Sweeting, Frank Peinemann |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 3 | 8% |
| France | 2 | 5% |
| United States | 2 | 5% |
| Spain | 2 | 5% |
| Ireland | 1 | 3% |
| Canada | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 29 | 73% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 27 | 68% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 9 | 23% |
| Scientists | 4 | 10% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 653 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 653 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 79 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 72 | 11% |
| Researcher | 50 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 38 | 6% |
| Other | 36 | 6% |
| Other | 112 | 17% |
| Unknown | 266 | 41% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 167 | 26% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 95 | 15% |
| Unspecified | 15 | 2% |
| Psychology | 14 | 2% |
| Engineering | 12 | 2% |
| Other | 74 | 11% |
| Unknown | 276 | 42% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 31. 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 26 October 2021.
All research outputs
#1,354,782
of 26,338,415 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#2,698
of 13,212 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#28,000
of 362,731 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#74
of 215 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,338,415 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,212 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% 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 362,731 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 215 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 65% of its contemporaries.