↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy compared to standard radical hysterectomy for women with early stage cervical cancer (stage Ia2 to IIa)

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, February 2019
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 tweeters
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
119 Mendeley
Title
Nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy compared to standard radical hysterectomy for women with early stage cervical cancer (stage Ia2 to IIa)
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, February 2019
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd012828.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Chumnan Kietpeerakool, Apiwat Aue-aungkul, Khadra Galaal, Chetta Ngamjarus, Pisake Lumbiganon

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 119 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 119 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 18 15%
Researcher 15 13%
Student > Bachelor 12 10%
Student > Postgraduate 9 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 8%
Other 21 18%
Unknown 35 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 39 33%
Nursing and Health Professions 17 14%
Social Sciences 8 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 3%
Other 12 10%
Unknown 36 30%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 02 December 2019.
All research outputs
#5,012,122
of 16,311,339 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#7,720
of 11,466 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#126,823
of 345,535 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#25
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 16,311,339 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,466 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 24.1. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 345,535 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.