| Title |
The predicted impact and cost‐effectiveness of systematic testing of people with incident colorectal cancer for Lynch syndrome
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Medical Journal of Australia, October 2019
|
| DOI | 10.5694/mja2.50356 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yoon‐Jung Kang, James Killen, Michael Caruana, Kate Simms, Natalie Taylor, Ian M Frayling, Tristan Snowsill, Nicola Huxley, Veerle MH Coupe, Suzanne Hughes, Victoria Freeman, Alex Boussioutas, Alison H Trainer, Robyn L Ward, Gillian Mitchell, Finlay A Macrae, Karen Canfell |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 25 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 | 5 | 20% |
| Australia | 5 | 20% |
| United States | 2 | 8% |
| India | 1 | 4% |
| Ireland | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 11 | 44% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 14 | 56% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 8 | 32% |
| Scientists | 3 | 12% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 66 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 66 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 11 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 11% |
| Other | 6 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 8% |
| Other | 6 | 9% |
| Unknown | 23 | 35% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 22 | 33% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 6% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 6% |
| Psychology | 2 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 7 | 11% |
| Unknown | 25 | 38% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 53. 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 2020.
All research outputs
#793,859
of 25,387,668 outputs
Outputs from Medical Journal of Australia
#456
of 5,724 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,501
of 366,057 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Medical Journal of Australia
#16
of 61 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,387,668 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,724 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 366,057 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 61 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.