The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 24 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 |
Smartphone applications for triaging adults with skin lesions that are suspicious for melanoma
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd013192 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Naomi Chuchu, Yemisi Takwoingi, Jacqueline Dinnes, Rubeta N Matin, Oliver Bassett, Jacqueline F Moreau, Susan E Bayliss, Clare Davenport, Kathie Godfrey, Susan O'Connell, Abhilash Jain, Fiona M Walter, Jonathan J Deeks, Hywel C Williams, Cochrane Skin Cancer Diagnostic Test Accuracy Group |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 6 | 25% |
| United States | 2 | 8% |
| Netherlands | 2 | 8% |
| France | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 13 | 54% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 20 | 83% |
| Scientists | 3 | 13% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 4% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 495 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 495 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 65 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 59 | 12% |
| Researcher | 35 | 7% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 31 | 6% |
| Other | 28 | 6% |
| Other | 93 | 19% |
| Unknown | 184 | 37% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 124 | 25% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 41 | 8% |
| Social Sciences | 17 | 3% |
| Psychology | 17 | 3% |
| Computer Science | 16 | 3% |
| Other | 76 | 15% |
| Unknown | 204 | 41% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 91. 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 June 2023.
All research outputs
#492,220
of 26,243,859 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#824
of 13,196 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,625
of 450,148 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#23
of 222 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,243,859 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,196 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 particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 450,148 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 222 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.