↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Nerve‐sparing radical hysterectomy compared to standard radical hysterectomy for women with early stage cervical cancer (stage Ia2 to IIa)

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

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
32 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
199 Mendeley
Title
Nerve‐sparing radical hysterectomy compared to standard radical hysterectomy for women with early stage cervical cancer (stage Ia2 to IIa)
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, February 2019
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd012828.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Chumnan Kietpeerakool, Apiwat Aue‐aungkul, Khadra Galaal, Chetta Ngamjarus, Pisake Lumbiganon

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 199 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 199 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 23 12%
Student > Master 20 10%
Researcher 15 8%
Other 13 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 6%
Other 30 15%
Unknown 86 43%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 52 26%
Nursing and Health Professions 22 11%
Social Sciences 7 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 7 4%
Engineering 3 2%
Other 17 9%
Unknown 91 46%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 02 December 2019.
All research outputs
#8,297,754
of 25,461,852 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#9,092
of 12,090 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#167,909
of 458,118 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#136
of 149 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,461,852 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 66th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,090 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 38.2. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 458,118 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 149 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.