| Title |
Interventions for visual field defects in people with stroke
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, May 2019
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd008388.pub3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Alex Pollock, Christine Hazelton, Fiona J Rowe, Sven Jonuscheit, Ashleigh Kernohan, Jayne Angilley, Clair A Henderson, Peter Langhorne, Pauline Campbell |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 70 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 32 | 46% |
| United States | 5 | 7% |
| Canada | 3 | 4% |
| Australia | 1 | 1% |
| Zimbabwe | 1 | 1% |
| Curaçao | 1 | 1% |
| Bangladesh | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 26 | 37% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 52 | 74% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 12 | 17% |
| Scientists | 5 | 7% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 1% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 420 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 420 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 56 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 50 | 12% |
| Researcher | 34 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 31 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 22 | 5% |
| Other | 54 | 13% |
| Unknown | 173 | 41% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 79 | 19% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 49 | 12% |
| Psychology | 27 | 6% |
| Neuroscience | 18 | 4% |
| Sports and Recreations | 10 | 2% |
| Other | 44 | 10% |
| Unknown | 193 | 46% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 53. 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 15 November 2022.
All research outputs
#806,615
of 25,462,162 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#1,539
of 12,090 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,738
of 364,327 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#25
of 142 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,462,162 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,090 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 38.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 364,327 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 142 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.