| Title |
Telephone interventions for symptom management in adults with cancer
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, June 2020
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd007568.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Emma Ream, Amanda Euesden Hughes, Anna Cox, Katy Skarparis, Alison Richardson, Vibe H Pedersen, Theresa Wiseman, Angus Forbes, Andrew Bryant |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 107 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 | 31 | 29% |
| Spain | 10 | 9% |
| United States | 5 | 5% |
| Canada | 3 | 3% |
| Japan | 3 | 3% |
| Italy | 2 | 2% |
| Australia | 2 | 2% |
| Switzerland | 1 | <1% |
| Ecuador | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 9 | 8% |
| Unknown | 40 | 37% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 68 | 64% |
| Scientists | 20 | 19% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 17 | 16% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 2% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 446 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 446 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 48 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 43 | 10% |
| Researcher | 40 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 27 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 20 | 4% |
| Other | 66 | 15% |
| Unknown | 202 | 45% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 75 | 17% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 65 | 15% |
| Psychology | 39 | 9% |
| Social Sciences | 10 | 2% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 1% |
| Other | 41 | 9% |
| Unknown | 211 | 47% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 108. 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 01 December 2020.
All research outputs
#367,007
of 24,484,013 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#647
of 12,927 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#11,545
of 402,340 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#19
of 198 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,484,013 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,927 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 34.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 402,340 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 198 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.