| Title |
Modes of exercise training for intermittent claudication
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, August 2020
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd009638.pub3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Sandra CP Jansen, Ukachukwu Okoroafor Abaraogu, Gert Jan Lauret, Farzin Fakhry, Hugo JP Fokkenrood, Joep AW Teijink |
Twitter Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 44 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 14 | 32% |
| Spain | 5 | 11% |
| Australia | 2 | 5% |
| France | 2 | 5% |
| Germany | 2 | 5% |
| Nigeria | 1 | 2% |
| South Africa | 1 | 2% |
| Canada | 1 | 2% |
| Italy | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 2 | 5% |
| Unknown | 13 | 30% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 23 | 52% |
| Scientists | 12 | 27% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 6 | 14% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 3 | 7% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 172 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 171 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 23 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 16 | 9% |
| Other | 11 | 6% |
| Researcher | 11 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 10 | 6% |
| Other | 24 | 14% |
| Unknown | 77 | 45% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 34 | 20% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 25 | 15% |
| Sports and Recreations | 11 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 2% |
| Psychology | 3 | 2% |
| Other | 10 | 6% |
| Unknown | 86 | 50% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 71. 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 03 April 2023.
All research outputs
#536,959
of 23,577,761 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#1,038
of 12,746 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#16,830
of 401,744 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#23
of 180 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,761 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,746 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 33.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 401,744 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 180 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.