| Title |
Intraoperative neuromonitoring versus visual nerve identification for prevention of recurrent laryngeal nerve injury in adults undergoing thyroid surgery
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2019
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd012483.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Roberto Cirocchi, Alberto Arezzo, Vito D'Andrea, Iosief Abraha, Georgi I Popivanov, Nicola Avenia, Chiara Gerardi, Brandon Michael Henry, Justus Randolph, Marcin Barczyñski |
Twitter Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 16 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Colombia | 4 | 25% |
| Spain | 3 | 19% |
| United States | 1 | 6% |
| Australia | 1 | 6% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 6 | 38% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 8 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 5 | 31% |
| Scientists | 2 | 13% |
| Unknown | 1 | 6% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 307 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 307 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 37 | 12% |
| Unspecified | 28 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 28 | 9% |
| Researcher | 26 | 8% |
| Other | 24 | 8% |
| Other | 71 | 23% |
| Unknown | 93 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 99 | 32% |
| Unspecified | 29 | 9% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 23 | 7% |
| Social Sciences | 7 | 2% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 6 | 2% |
| Other | 34 | 11% |
| Unknown | 109 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 19 September 2023.
All research outputs
#2,132,965
of 23,402,852 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#4,655
of 12,685 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#52,272
of 439,633 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#98
of 187 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,402,852 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,685 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 63% 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 439,633 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 187 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.