| Title |
A comparison of outcomes of transurethral versus suprapubic catheterization after Burch cystourethropexy
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Urogynecology Journal & Pelvic Floor Dysfunction, July 2004
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00192-004-1209-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Terry S. Dunn, Johanna Figge, Doug Wolf |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 11 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 11 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 2 | 18% |
| Researcher | 2 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 9% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 3 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 45% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 9% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 1 | 9% |
| Sports and Recreations | 1 | 9% |
| Engineering | 1 | 9% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 2 | 18% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 06 June 2019.
All research outputs
#8,534,976
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from International Urogynecology Journal & Pelvic Floor Dysfunction
#888
of 2,900 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,162
of 59,672 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Urogynecology Journal & Pelvic Floor Dysfunction
#1
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,900 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% 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 59,672 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them