The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 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 |
Needle aspiration versus intercostal tube drainage for pneumothorax in the newborn
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, February 2019
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd011724.pub3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Matteo Bruschettini, Olga Romantsik, Simona Zappettini, Colm PF O'Donnell, Maria Grazia Calevo |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 2 | 13% |
| United States | 1 | 7% |
| Sweden | 1 | 7% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 10 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 11 | 73% |
| Scientists | 2 | 13% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 13% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 143 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 143 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 15 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 14 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 8% |
| Other | 11 | 8% |
| Unspecified | 7 | 5% |
| Other | 26 | 18% |
| Unknown | 58 | 41% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 43 | 30% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 15 | 10% |
| Unspecified | 6 | 4% |
| Psychology | 4 | 3% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 1% |
| Other | 9 | 6% |
| Unknown | 64 | 45% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 01 July 2021.
All research outputs
#2,938,094
of 26,243,859 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#5,539
of 13,196 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#65,750
of 451,813 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#108
of 192 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,243,859 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% 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 gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% 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 451,813 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 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 192 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.