| Title |
Thoracic imaging tests for the diagnosis of COVID‐19
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, September 2020
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd013639.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jean-Paul Salameh, Mariska MG Leeflang, Lotty Hooft, Nayaar Islam, Trevor A McGrath, Christian B van der Pol, Robert A Frank, Ross Prager, Samanjit S Hare, Carole Dennie, René Spijker, Jonathan J Deeks, Jacqueline Dinnes, Kevin Jenniskens, Daniël A Korevaar, Jérémie F Cohen, Ann Van den Bruel, Yemisi Takwoingi, Janneke van de Wijgert, Johanna AAG Damen, Junfeng Wang, Cochrane COVID-19 Diagnostic Test Accuracy Group, Matthew DF McInnes |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 99 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 Kingdom | 10 | 10% |
| Canada | 9 | 9% |
| Mexico | 6 | 6% |
| Spain | 5 | 5% |
| India | 3 | 3% |
| Colombia | 3 | 3% |
| United States | 3 | 3% |
| Switzerland | 2 | 2% |
| France | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 14 | 14% |
| Unknown | 42 | 42% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 62 | 63% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 22 | 22% |
| Scientists | 12 | 12% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 3 | 3% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 232 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 232 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 37 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 31 | 13% |
| Researcher | 22 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 16 | 7% |
| Other | 11 | 5% |
| Other | 30 | 13% |
| Unknown | 85 | 37% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 80 | 34% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 20 | 9% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 9 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 6 | 3% |
| Psychology | 4 | 2% |
| Other | 25 | 11% |
| Unknown | 88 | 38% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 88. 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 20 May 2022.
All research outputs
#494,004
of 25,732,188 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#864
of 13,137 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,483
of 433,700 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#20
of 174 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,732,188 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,137 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 433,700 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 174 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.