↓ Skip to main content

Surgical techniques for uterine incision and uterine closure at the time of caesarean section

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (77th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
35 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
153 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
Surgical techniques for uterine incision and uterine closure at the time of caesarean section
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2014
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd004732.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jodie M Dodd, Elizabeth R Anderson, Simon Gates, Rosalie M Grivell

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 153 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Rwanda 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Unknown 151 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 27 18%
Student > Master 23 15%
Researcher 20 13%
Student > Bachelor 16 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 10%
Other 36 24%
Unknown 16 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 93 61%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 7%
Social Sciences 8 5%
Psychology 6 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 3%
Other 8 5%
Unknown 23 15%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 20 October 2016.
All research outputs
#3,053,294
of 12,527,219 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#5,400
of 8,923 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#42,717
of 192,434 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#127
of 209 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,527,219 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
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 45th percentile – i.e., 45% 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 192,434 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 209 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.