↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Routine neonatal circumcision for the prevention of urinary tract infections in infancy

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, November 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
policy
2 policy sources
twitter
15 tweeters
facebook
12 Facebook pages
wikipedia
7 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
28 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
91 Mendeley
Title
Routine neonatal circumcision for the prevention of urinary tract infections in infancy
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, November 2012
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd009129.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Vanitha A Jagannath, Zbys Fedorowicz, Vikas Sud, Abhishek Kumar Verma, Sakineh Hajebrahimi

Abstract

Neonatal circumcision is a fairly common surgical procedure that may be carried out for medical reasons, one of them being prevention of urinary tract infections (UTI) in male infants. Circumcision could help in reducing the incidence of UTI by reducing periurethral bacterial colonization, which is accepted as a potential risk factor in UTI. Evidence is needed to inform the benefits or harm for the routine use of this intervention.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 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 91 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Macao 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Unknown 89 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 18 20%
Student > Bachelor 10 11%
Researcher 7 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 8%
Student > Postgraduate 6 7%
Other 20 22%
Unknown 23 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 37 41%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 7%
Psychology 5 5%
Social Sciences 4 4%
Chemistry 2 2%
Other 10 11%
Unknown 27 30%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 30. 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 25 September 2020.
All research outputs
#1,110,908
of 22,919,505 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#2,504
of 12,332 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,850
of 179,361 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#46
of 236 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,919,505 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,332 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 30.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% 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 179,361 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 236 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.