↓ Skip to main content

Combined oral contraceptives: venous thrombosis

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, March 2014
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 (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (97th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
12 news outlets
policy
1 policy source
twitter
75 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
110 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
50 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
Combined oral contraceptives: venous thrombosis
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, March 2014
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd010813.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marcos de Bastos, Bernardine H. Stegeman, Frits R. Rosendaal, Astrid Van Hylckama Vlieg, Frans M Helmerhorst, Theo Stijnen, Olaf M Dekkers

Abstract

Combined oral contraceptive (COC) use has been associated with venous thrombosis (VT) (i.e., deep venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism). The VT risk has been evaluated for many estrogen doses and progestagen types contained in COC but no comprehensive comparison involving commonly used COC is available.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 75 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 50 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 50 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 3 6%
Student > Master 3 6%
Researcher 2 4%
Student > Postgraduate 2 4%
Other 1 2%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 36 72%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 12%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 2%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 36 72%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 159. 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 30 July 2019.
All research outputs
#87,448
of 13,379,156 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#185
of 10,571 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,364
of 187,801 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#6
of 210 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,379,156 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,571 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 187,801 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 210 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 97% of its contemporaries.