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 |
The eVALuate study: two parallel randomised trials, one comparing laparoscopic with abdominal hysterectomy, the other comparing laparoscopic with vaginal hysterectomy
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
British Medical Journal, January 2004
|
| DOI | 10.1136/bmj.37984.623889.f6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ray Garry, Jayne Fountain, Su Mason, Jeremy Hawe, Vicky Napp, Jason Abbott, Richard Clayton, Graham Phillips, Mark Whittaker, Richard Lilford, Stephen Bridgman, Julia Brown |
| Abstract |
To compare the effects of laparoscopic hysterectomy and abdominal hysterectomy in the abdominal trial, and laparoscopic hysterectomy and vaginal hysterectomy in the vaginal trial. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Turkey | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 172 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 1% |
| Brazil | 2 | 1% |
| Colombia | 1 | <1% |
| Ireland | 1 | <1% |
| Sri Lanka | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 164 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 25 | 15% |
| Other | 23 | 13% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 22 | 13% |
| Researcher | 21 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 17 | 10% |
| Other | 44 | 26% |
| Unknown | 20 | 12% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 125 | 73% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 2% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 1% |
| Mathematics | 1 | <1% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 7 | 4% |
| Unknown | 32 | 19% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 28 October 2020.
All research outputs
#3,515,553
of 25,837,817 outputs
Outputs from British Medical Journal
#25,729
of 64,974 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,163
of 149,194 outputs
Outputs of similar age from British Medical Journal
#51
of 206 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,837,817 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 64,974 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 45.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% 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 149,194 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 206 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.