| Title |
Laparoscopic vs. robotic rectal cancer surgery and the effect on conversion rates: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and propensity-score-matched studies
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Techniques in Coloproctology, January 2019
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10151-018-1920-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
K. Phan, H. R. Kahlaee, S. H. Kim, J. W. T. Toh |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 30 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 Kingdom | 6 | 20% |
| United States | 6 | 20% |
| India | 2 | 7% |
| Spain | 2 | 7% |
| Saudi Arabia | 1 | 3% |
| Sweden | 1 | 3% |
| France | 1 | 3% |
| Greece | 1 | 3% |
| Brazil | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 9 | 30% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 14 | 47% |
| Members of the public | 9 | 30% |
| Scientists | 4 | 13% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 3 | 10% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 72 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 72 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 11% |
| Researcher | 8 | 11% |
| Other | 6 | 8% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 7% |
| Unspecified | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 15 | 21% |
| Unknown | 27 | 38% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 33 | 46% |
| Unspecified | 3 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 1% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 1 | 1% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 2 | 3% |
| Unknown | 31 | 43% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. 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 18 May 2019.
All research outputs
#2,075,518
of 24,615,420 outputs
Outputs from Techniques in Coloproctology
#216
of 1,333 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#48,020
of 447,282 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Techniques in Coloproctology
#23
of 45 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,615,420 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,333 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% 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 447,282 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 45 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 51% of its contemporaries.