↓ Skip to main content

Medical methods for first trimester abortion

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, November 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
5 news outlets
blogs
2 blogs
policy
1 policy source
twitter
4 X users
patent
1 patent
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
43 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
201 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
309 Mendeley
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.
Title
Medical methods for first trimester abortion
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, November 2011
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd002855.pub4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Regina Kulier, Nathalie Kapp, A Metin Gülmezoglu, G Justus Hofmeyr, Linan Cheng, Aldo Campana

Abstract

Surgical abortion by vacuum aspiration or dilatation and curettage has been the method of choice for early pregnancy termination since the 1960s. Medical abortion became an alternative method of first trimester pregnancy termination with the availability of prostaglandins in the early 1970s and anti-progesterones in the 1980s. The most widely researched drugs are prostaglandins (PGs) alone, mifepristone alone, methotrexate alone, mifepristone with prostaglandins and methotrexate with prostaglandins.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 309 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Colombia 1 <1%
Peru 1 <1%
Unknown 304 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 43 14%
Student > Master 41 13%
Student > Bachelor 40 13%
Student > Postgraduate 26 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 6%
Other 57 18%
Unknown 83 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 143 46%
Nursing and Health Professions 23 7%
Social Sciences 16 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 7 2%
Other 25 8%
Unknown 87 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 64. 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 10 September 2022.
All research outputs
#671,195
of 25,457,858 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#1,238
of 11,499 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,592
of 155,204 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#10
of 157 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,858 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,499 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 40.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 155,204 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 157 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 93% of its contemporaries.