↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Combined proximal descending aortic endografting plus distal bare metal stenting (PETTICOAT technique) versus conventional proximal descending aortic stent graft repair for complicated type B aortic…

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

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (68th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
113 Mendeley
Title
Combined proximal descending aortic endografting plus distal bare metal stenting (PETTICOAT technique) versus conventional proximal descending aortic stent graft repair for complicated type B aortic dissections
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2019
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd013149.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Dan Rong, Yangyang Ge, Jie Liu, Xiaoping Liu, Wei Guo

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 113 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 113 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 12 11%
Other 10 9%
Researcher 10 9%
Student > Bachelor 8 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 6%
Other 15 13%
Unknown 51 45%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 34 30%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 4%
Psychology 2 2%
Social Sciences 2 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 <1%
Other 8 7%
Unknown 61 54%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 04 November 2019.
All research outputs
#6,950,351
of 25,462,162 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#8,234
of 12,090 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#120,624
of 377,514 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#140
of 168 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,462,162 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
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 is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% 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 377,514 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 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 168 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.