The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 20 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 |
Fresh versus frozen embryo transfers in assisted reproduction
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, February 2021
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd011184.pub3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Tjitske Zaat, Miriam Zagers, Femke Mol, Mariëtte Goddijn, Madelon van Wely, Sebastiaan Mastenbroek |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 15% |
| United Kingdom | 3 | 15% |
| Netherlands | 2 | 10% |
| India | 1 | 5% |
| Japan | 1 | 5% |
| Germany | 1 | 5% |
| Brazil | 1 | 5% |
| Saudi Arabia | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 7 | 35% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 14 | 70% |
| Scientists | 3 | 15% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 10% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 5% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 274 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 274 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 25 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 19 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 17 | 6% |
| Researcher | 15 | 5% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 4% |
| Other | 34 | 12% |
| Unknown | 152 | 55% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 66 | 24% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 12 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 1% |
| Engineering | 4 | 1% |
| Other | 15 | 5% |
| Unknown | 165 | 60% |
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 21 June 2022.
All research outputs
#1,402,567
of 26,538,769 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#2,789
of 13,242 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#39,274
of 545,457 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#38
of 171 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,538,769 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,242 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% 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 545,457 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 171 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.