| Title |
Does routine surveillance imaging after completing treatment for childhood solid tumours cause more harm than good? A systematic review and meta-analysis protocol
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Systematic Reviews, July 2019
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13643-019-1096-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jessica E. Morgan, Melissa Harden, Robert S. Phillips |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 | 4 | 80% |
| Unknown | 1 | 20% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 80% |
| Scientists | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 44 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 3 | 7% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 9 | 20% |
| Unknown | 19 | 43% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 6 | 14% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 14% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 7% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 4 | 9% |
| Unknown | 22 | 50% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 07 January 2020.
All research outputs
#6,975,532
of 23,152,542 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Reviews
#1,254
of 2,014 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#123,208
of 346,549 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Reviews
#29
of 63 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,152,542 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,014 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.8. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% 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 346,549 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 63 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 53% of its contemporaries.