You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
Title |
Cigarette smoking as a risk factor for coronary heart disease in women compared with men: a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies
|
---|---|
Published in |
The Lancet, August 2011
|
DOI | 10.1016/s0140-6736(11)60781-2 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Rachel R Huxley, Mark Woodward |
Abstract |
Prevalence of smoking is increasing in women in some populations and is a risk factor for coronary heart disease. Whether smoking confers the same excess risk of coronary heart disease for women as it does for men is unknown. Therefore, we aimed to estimate the effect of smoking on coronary heart disease in women compared with men after accounting for sex differences in other major risk factors. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 127 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 States | 28 | 22% |
United Kingdom | 11 | 9% |
Spain | 6 | 5% |
Canada | 4 | 3% |
Japan | 4 | 3% |
Brazil | 3 | 2% |
Peru | 2 | 2% |
Indonesia | 2 | 2% |
Chile | 2 | 2% |
Other | 18 | 14% |
Unknown | 47 | 37% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 99 | 78% |
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 16 | 13% |
Scientists | 4 | 3% |
Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 2% |
Unknown | 6 | 5% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 562 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United States | 3 | <1% |
Brazil | 2 | <1% |
United Kingdom | 2 | <1% |
Indonesia | 1 | <1% |
Kenya | 1 | <1% |
India | 1 | <1% |
Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
Mexico | 1 | <1% |
Colombia | 1 | <1% |
Other | 0 | 0% |
Unknown | 549 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Researcher | 88 | 16% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 81 | 14% |
Student > Master | 74 | 13% |
Student > Bachelor | 56 | 10% |
Student > Postgraduate | 34 | 6% |
Other | 114 | 20% |
Unknown | 115 | 20% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 216 | 38% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 34 | 6% |
Psychology | 28 | 5% |
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 25 | 4% |
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 24 | 4% |
Other | 86 | 15% |
Unknown | 149 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 189. 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 08 March 2023.
All research outputs
#214,812
of 25,837,817 outputs
Outputs from The Lancet
#2,471
of 43,003 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#704
of 134,382 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The Lancet
#8
of 480 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,837,817 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 43,003 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 68.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 134,382 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 480 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 98% of its contemporaries.