| Title |
Screening for colorectal cancer using the faecal occult blood test, Hemoccult
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2007
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd001216.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Paul Hewitson, Paul P Glasziou, Les Irwig, Bernie Towler, Eila Watson |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 19 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 | 2 | 11% |
| Netherlands | 2 | 11% |
| Belgium | 2 | 11% |
| Spain | 2 | 11% |
| Japan | 2 | 11% |
| Mexico | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 8 | 42% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 16 | 84% |
| Scientists | 2 | 11% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 5% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 503 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 4 | <1% |
| Australia | 2 | <1% |
| United States | 2 | <1% |
| Uruguay | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Israel | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Estonia | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 3 | <1% |
| Unknown | 486 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 85 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 65 | 13% |
| Researcher | 60 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 50 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 42 | 8% |
| Other | 107 | 21% |
| Unknown | 94 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 252 | 50% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 25 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 20 | 4% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 16 | 3% |
| Psychology | 16 | 3% |
| Other | 74 | 15% |
| Unknown | 100 | 20% |
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 01 April 2024.
All research outputs
#678,880
of 25,760,414 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#1,239
of 13,137 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,508
of 175,340 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#2
of 72 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,760,414 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 13,137 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 33.9. 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 175,340 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 72 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 97% of its contemporaries.