The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 4 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
First clinical evaluation of the safety and efficacy of tarumase for the debridement of venous leg ulcers
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Wound Journal, February 2024
|
| DOI | 10.1111/iwj.14805 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
David M. Fairlamb, Kinga Szepeshazi, David Goldsmith, Peter Danos, Hadar Lev‐Tov, Nathan Young, Jason Hanft, Charles Zelen |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 4 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Lecturer | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 3 | 75% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 25% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 59. 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 04 March 2024.
All research outputs
#715,779
of 25,405,598 outputs
Outputs from International Wound Journal
#33
of 1,224 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,704
of 187,180 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Wound Journal
#1
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,405,598 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,224 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 187,180 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 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 99% of its contemporaries.