↓ Skip to main content

Open versus laparoscopic pyloromyotomy for pyloric stenosis

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, March 2021
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (85th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (53rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
20 tweeters
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
91 Mendeley
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.
Title
Open versus laparoscopic pyloromyotomy for pyloric stenosis
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, March 2021
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd012827.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ralph F Staerkle, Fabian Lunger, Lukas Fink, Tom Sasse, Martin Lacher, Erik von Elm, Ahmed I Marwan, Stefan Holland-Cunz, Raphael Nicolas Vuille-dit-Bille

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 20 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 91 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Unknown 90 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 14 15%
Student > Master 9 10%
Student > Bachelor 8 9%
Other 6 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 7%
Other 13 14%
Unknown 35 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 27%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 11%
Unspecified 4 4%
Social Sciences 3 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 2%
Other 10 11%
Unknown 37 41%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 12 June 2021.
All research outputs
#2,231,127
of 23,368,819 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#4,824
of 12,645 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#59,744
of 423,131 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#81
of 172 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,368,819 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,645 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 33.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% 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 423,131 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 172 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 53% of its contemporaries.