| Title |
Visual inspection for diagnosing cutaneous melanoma in adults
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd013194 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jacqueline Dinnes, Jonathan J Deeks, Matthew J Grainge, Naomi Chuchu, Lavinia Ferrante di Ruffano, Rubeta N Matin, David R Thomson, Kai Yuen Wong, Roger Benjamin Aldridge, Rachel Abbott, Monica Fawzy, Susan E Bayliss, Yemisi Takwoingi, Clare Davenport, Kathie Godfrey, Fiona M Walter, Hywel C Williams |
Twitter Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 297 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 297 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 43 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 30 | 10% |
| Researcher | 28 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 22 | 7% |
| Other | 16 | 5% |
| Other | 48 | 16% |
| Unknown | 110 | 37% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 78 | 26% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 29 | 10% |
| Psychology | 12 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 10 | 3% |
| Computer Science | 6 | 2% |
| Other | 37 | 12% |
| Unknown | 125 | 42% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 21. 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 April 2022.
All research outputs
#1,552,995
of 23,543,207 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#3,570
of 12,732 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#37,239
of 439,822 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#87
of 220 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,543,207 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 12,732 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 33.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% 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 439,822 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 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 220 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 59% of its contemporaries.