| Title |
Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) for improving aphasia in adults with aphasia after stroke
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, May 2019
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd009760.pub4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Bernhard Elsner, Joachim Kugler, Marcus Pohl, Jan Mehrholz |
Twitter Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 30 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 | 5 | 17% |
| Japan | 5 | 17% |
| United States | 4 | 13% |
| Australia | 2 | 7% |
| Italy | 1 | 3% |
| Egypt | 1 | 3% |
| Belgium | 1 | 3% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 3% |
| France | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 9 | 30% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 24 | 80% |
| Scientists | 3 | 10% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 7% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 3% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 396 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 396 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 70 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 41 | 10% |
| Researcher | 31 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 23 | 6% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 17 | 4% |
| Other | 52 | 13% |
| Unknown | 162 | 41% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 62 | 16% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 50 | 13% |
| Neuroscience | 38 | 10% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 28 | 7% |
| Social Sciences | 8 | 2% |
| Other | 31 | 8% |
| Unknown | 179 | 45% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 25. 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 29 April 2020.
All research outputs
#1,406,623
of 23,868,111 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#3,191
of 12,767 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#32,316
of 352,458 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#60
of 184 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,868,111 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,767 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 33.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% 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 352,458 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 184 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 67% of its contemporaries.