| Title |
Sucrose for analgesia in newborn infants undergoing painful procedures
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd001069.pub5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Bonnie Stevens, Janet Yamada, Arne Ohlsson, Sarah Haliburton, Allyson Shorkey |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 257 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 | 50 | 19% |
| Spain | 30 | 12% |
| Canada | 17 | 7% |
| United States | 13 | 5% |
| Australia | 10 | 4% |
| Argentina | 6 | 2% |
| Colombia | 5 | 2% |
| Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of | 4 | 2% |
| Mexico | 3 | 1% |
| Other | 27 | 11% |
| Unknown | 92 | 36% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 168 | 65% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 44 | 17% |
| Scientists | 36 | 14% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 9 | 4% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 742 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 1 | <1% |
| South Africa | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Denmark | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 737 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 112 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 101 | 14% |
| Researcher | 61 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 61 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 41 | 6% |
| Other | 123 | 17% |
| Unknown | 243 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 181 | 24% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 144 | 19% |
| Psychology | 36 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 20 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 14 | 2% |
| Other | 79 | 11% |
| Unknown | 268 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 262. 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 16 February 2024.
All research outputs
#140,421
of 25,639,676 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#255
of 13,152 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,841
of 373,059 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#7
of 227 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,639,676 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,152 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 373,059 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 227 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 96% of its contemporaries.