↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Trifocal intraocular lenses versus bifocal intraocular lenses after cataract extraction among participants with presbyopia

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, June 2020
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (68th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
51 Mendeley
Title
Trifocal intraocular lenses versus bifocal intraocular lenses after cataract extraction among participants with presbyopia
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, June 2020
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd012648.pub2
Authors

Diego Zamora-de La Cruz, Karla Zúñiga-Posselt, John Bartlett, Mario Gutierrez, Samuel A Abariga

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 51 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 51 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 9 18%
Other 6 12%
Student > Bachelor 6 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 10%
Student > Postgraduate 4 8%
Other 7 14%
Unknown 14 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 39%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 10%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 4%
Psychology 2 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 2%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 18 35%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 05 August 2020.
All research outputs
#4,541,176
of 18,523,374 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#6,769
of 11,840 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#93,472
of 298,909 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#18
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 18,523,374 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,840 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 26.0. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% 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 298,909 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 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.