↓ Skip to main content

Aqueous shunts with mitomycin C versus aqueous shunts alone for glaucoma

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2019
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (79th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
6 X users
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
137 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
Aqueous shunts with mitomycin C versus aqueous shunts alone for glaucoma
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2019
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd011875.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Valencia Hui Xian Foo, Hla M Htoon, Derek S Welsbie, Shamira A Perera

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 137 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 137 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 18 13%
Student > Master 14 10%
Other 10 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 7%
Researcher 8 6%
Other 26 19%
Unknown 51 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 43 31%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 8%
Psychology 4 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 2%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 2%
Other 11 8%
Unknown 62 45%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 13 March 2020.
All research outputs
#3,627,321
of 25,595,500 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#6,341
of 13,156 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#74,160
of 364,817 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#114
of 184 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,595,500 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,156 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% 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 364,817 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 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 184 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.