↓ Skip to main content

Oral vitamin B12 versus intramuscular vitamin B12 for vitamin B12 deficiency

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2005
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
29 news outlets
twitter
88 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages
wikipedia
10 Wikipedia pages
googleplus
47 Google+ users
video
5 YouTube creators

Citations

dimensions_citation
212 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
239 Mendeley
citeulike
4 CiteULike
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
Oral vitamin B12 versus intramuscular vitamin B12 for vitamin B12 deficiency
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2005
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd004655.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Josep Vidal‐Alaball, Christopher Butler, Rebecca Cannings‐John, Andrew Goringe, Kerry Hood, Andrew McCaddon, Ian McDowell, Alexandra Papaioannou

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 88 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 239 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 2 <1%
United States 2 <1%
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Zimbabwe 1 <1%
Malaysia 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Unknown 230 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 43 18%
Student > Bachelor 34 14%
Researcher 28 12%
Student > Postgraduate 24 10%
Other 22 9%
Other 46 19%
Unknown 42 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 96 40%
Nursing and Health Professions 24 10%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 17 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 13 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 12 5%
Other 27 11%
Unknown 50 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 346. 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 23 March 2024.
All research outputs
#96,248
of 25,809,907 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#172
of 13,129 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#79
of 69,831 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#1
of 40 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,809,907 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 13,129 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.2. 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 69,831 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 40 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.