| Title |
Aqueous shunts with mitomycin C versus aqueous shunts alone for glaucoma
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2019
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd011875.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Valencia Hui Xian Foo, Hla M Htoon, Derek S Welsbie, Shamira A Perera |
Twitter Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 | 3 | 43% |
| United States | 1 | 14% |
| Unknown | 3 | 43% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 71% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 29% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 128 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 128 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 18 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 14 | 11% |
| Other | 10 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 8% |
| Researcher | 8 | 6% |
| Other | 23 | 18% |
| Unknown | 45 | 35% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 43 | 34% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 6% |
| Psychology | 4 | 3% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 2% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 3 | 2% |
| Other | 12 | 9% |
| Unknown | 55 | 43% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 13 March 2020.
All research outputs
#2,959,363
of 23,144,579 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#5,663
of 12,381 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#65,716
of 350,214 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#112
of 182 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,144,579 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,381 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 32.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% 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 350,214 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 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 182 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.