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 |
Single or combined immune checkpoint inhibitors compared to first‐line platinum‐based chemotherapy with or without bevacizumab for people with advanced non‐small cell lung cancer
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2020
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd013257.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Roberto Ferrara, Martina Imbimbo, Reem Malouf, Sophie Paget-Bailly, François Calais, Corynne Marchal, Virginie Westeel |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 2 | 17% |
| Italy | 1 | 8% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 8 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 10 | 83% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 8% |
| Scientists | 1 | 8% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 101 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 101 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 11 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 8% |
| Researcher | 7 | 7% |
| Other | 6 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 6% |
| Other | 16 | 16% |
| Unknown | 47 | 47% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 21 | 21% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 6 | 6% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 6% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 6 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 4% |
| Other | 9 | 9% |
| Unknown | 49 | 49% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 63. 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 08 November 2023.
All research outputs
#682,914
of 25,595,500 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#1,272
of 13,156 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#18,702
of 522,824 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#20
of 182 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,595,500 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 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 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 522,824 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 182 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.