↓ Skip to main content

Reduction versus abrupt cessation in smokers who want to quit

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, November 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
blogs
3 blogs
policy
1 policy source
twitter
58 tweeters
facebook
6 Facebook pages
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
92 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
127 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
Reduction versus abrupt cessation in smokers who want to quit
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, November 2012
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd008033.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nicola Lindson-Hawley, Paul Aveyard, John R Hughes

Abstract

The standard way to stop smoking is to quit abruptly on a designated quit day. A number of smokers have tried unsuccessfully to quit this way. Reducing smoking before quitting could be an alternative approach to cessation. Before this method is adopted it is important to determine whether it is at least as successful as abrupt quitting.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 58 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 127 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Colombia 1 <1%
Unknown 125 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 27 21%
Researcher 22 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 10%
Student > Bachelor 11 9%
Student > Postgraduate 9 7%
Other 24 19%
Unknown 21 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 47 37%
Psychology 23 18%
Social Sciences 8 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 4%
Other 11 9%
Unknown 28 22%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 80. 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 January 2020.
All research outputs
#382,078
of 20,344,586 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#744
of 12,041 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,433
of 282,206 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#33
of 481 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 20,344,586 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 12,041 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 28.1. 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 282,206 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 481 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 93% of its contemporaries.