| Title |
Blue‐light filtering intraocular lenses (IOLs) for protecting macular health
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, May 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd011977.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Laura E Downie, Ljoudmila Busija, Peter R Keller |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 138 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Korea, Republic of | 8 | 6% |
| Spain | 6 | 4% |
| Australia | 4 | 3% |
| Korea, Democratic People's Republic of | 3 | 2% |
| Canada | 2 | 1% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 1% |
| Bosnia and Herzegovina | 1 | <1% |
| Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 6 | 4% |
| Unknown | 104 | 75% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 128 | 93% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 7 | 5% |
| Scientists | 2 | 1% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | <1% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 274 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 274 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 33 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 28 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 22 | 8% |
| Other | 20 | 7% |
| Researcher | 19 | 7% |
| Other | 57 | 21% |
| Unknown | 95 | 35% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 83 | 30% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 21 | 8% |
| Neuroscience | 11 | 4% |
| Unspecified | 6 | 2% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 6 | 2% |
| Other | 41 | 15% |
| Unknown | 106 | 39% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 208. 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 24 March 2024.
All research outputs
#193,322
of 25,880,948 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#321
of 13,153 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,179
of 345,410 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#11
of 188 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,880,948 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 13,153 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 345,410 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 188 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 94% of its contemporaries.