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 |
Which are more correctly diagnosed: Conventional Papanicolaou smears or Thinprep samples? A comparative study of 9 years of external quality‐assurance testing
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cancer Cytopathology, December 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1002/cncy.21498 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Margaret C. Cummings, Louise Marquart, Anita M. Pelecanos, Gail Perkins, David Papadimos, Peter O'Rourke, Jennifer A. Ross |
| Abstract |
The Royal College of Pathologists of Australasia Cytopathology Quality Assurance Program offers external testing in gynecologic cytology to Australasian and international laboratories. Laboratory interpretation of conventional Papanicolaou (Pap) smears is compared with interpretation of liquid-based cervical cytologic (ThinPrep) samples. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Greece | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 20 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 20% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 10% |
| Researcher | 2 | 10% |
| Professor | 1 | 5% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 9 | 45% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 20% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 20% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 9 | 45% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 March 2015.
All research outputs
#16,782,129
of 24,749,767 outputs
Outputs from Cancer Cytopathology
#1,288
of 1,413 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#224,773
of 371,856 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cancer Cytopathology
#28
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,749,767 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,413 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.5. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 371,856 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.