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 |
Non‐clinical interventions for reducing unnecessary caesarean section
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, June 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd005528.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Suthit Khunpradit, Emma Tavender, Pisake Lumbiganon, Malinee Laopaiboon, Jason Wasiak, Russell L Gruen |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 17 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 States | 4 | 24% |
| United Kingdom | 3 | 18% |
| Spain | 2 | 12% |
| United Arab Emirates | 1 | 6% |
| Italy | 1 | 6% |
| Colombia | 1 | 6% |
| Mexico | 1 | 6% |
| Saudi Arabia | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 3 | 18% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 11 | 65% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 5 | 29% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 6% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 485 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 6 | 1% |
| Canada | 4 | <1% |
| United States | 2 | <1% |
| Italy | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Norway | 1 | <1% |
| South Africa | 1 | <1% |
| Colombia | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 466 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 86 | 18% |
| Researcher | 75 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 61 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 57 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 27 | 6% |
| Other | 99 | 20% |
| Unknown | 80 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 183 | 38% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 67 | 14% |
| Psychology | 47 | 10% |
| Social Sciences | 33 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 8 | 2% |
| Other | 47 | 10% |
| Unknown | 100 | 21% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 21. 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 06 January 2020.
All research outputs
#1,817,722
of 25,457,297 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#3,881
of 11,499 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#7,971
of 126,447 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#21
of 99 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,297 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% 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 gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% 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 126,447 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 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 99 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.