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.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
| 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 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Diego Zamora-de La Cruz, Karla Zúñiga-Posselt, John Bartlett, Mario Gutierrez, Samuel A Abariga |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 2 | 29% |
| Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of | 1 | 14% |
| Mexico | 1 | 14% |
| Ecuador | 1 | 14% |
| United States | 1 | 14% |
| Unknown | 1 | 14% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 71% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 14% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 14% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 98 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 98 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 12 | 12% |
| Other | 8 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 8 | 8% |
| Researcher | 7 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 6% |
| Other | 14 | 14% |
| Unknown | 43 | 44% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 31 | 32% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 2% |
| Psychology | 2 | 2% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 5 | 5% |
| Unknown | 49 | 50% |
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 05 August 2020.
All research outputs
#7,113,982
of 26,228,764 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#8,591
of 13,250 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#150,175
of 437,924 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#129
of 191 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,228,764 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 13,250 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 33.8. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% 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 437,924 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 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 191 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.