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.
Twitter Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Uterine transplantation: a systematic review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinics, January 2016
|
| DOI | 10.6061/clinics/2016(11)10 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Dani Ejzenberg, Luana Regina Baratelli Carelli Mendes, Luciana Bertocco de Paiva Haddad, Edmund Chada Baracat, Luiz Augusto Carneiro D'Albuquerque, Wellington Andraus |
| Abstract |
Up to 15% of the reproductive population is infertile, and 3 to 5% of these cases are caused by uterine dysfunction. This abnormality generally leads women to consider surrogacy or adoption. Uterine transplantation, although still experimental, may be an option in these cases. This systematic review will outline the recommendations, surgical aspects, immunosuppressive drugs and reproductive aspects related to experimental uterine transplantation in women. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 39 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 39 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 13% |
| Researcher | 5 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 10% |
| Other | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 5 | 13% |
| Unknown | 12 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 14 | 36% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 8% |
| Arts and Humanities | 3 | 8% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 4 | 10% |
| Unknown | 13 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 07 August 2021.
All research outputs
#14,104,761
of 22,603,384 outputs
Outputs from Clinics
#515
of 1,046 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#213,581
of 409,711 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinics
#17
of 39 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,603,384 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,046 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% 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 409,711 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 39 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 56% of its contemporaries.