↓ Skip to main content

Strategies for communicating contraceptive effectiveness

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
34 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
165 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
Strategies for communicating contraceptive effectiveness
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2013
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd006964.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Laureen M Lopez, Markus Steiner, David A Grimes, Deborah Hilgenberg, Kenneth F Schulz

Abstract

Knowledge of contraceptive effectiveness is crucial to making an informed choice. The consumer has to comprehend the pros and cons of the contraceptive methods being considered. Choice may be influenced by understanding the likelihood of pregnancy with each method and factors that influence effectiveness.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 165 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Congo, The Democratic Republic of the 1 <1%
Unknown 162 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 39 24%
Researcher 21 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 10%
Student > Bachelor 13 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 6%
Other 33 20%
Unknown 33 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 56 34%
Social Sciences 20 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 19 12%
Psychology 9 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 4%
Other 16 10%
Unknown 39 24%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 29 May 2013.
All research outputs
#9,618,871
of 12,527,219 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#8,351
of 8,923 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#95,242
of 146,117 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#101
of 117 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,527,219 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,923 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.2. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% 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 146,117 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 117 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.