↓ Skip to main content

Repeated use of pre- and postcoital hormonal contraception for prevention of pregnancy

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, September 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 (94th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
34 tweeters
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
129 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
Repeated use of pre- and postcoital hormonal contraception for prevention of pregnancy
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, September 2014
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd007595.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Vera Halpern, Elizabeth G Raymond, Laureen M Lopez

Abstract

Repeated use of postcoital hormonal contraception is not currently recommended due to the higher risk of side effects and lower contraceptive effectiveness compared to other modern methods of contraception. However, emerging evidence indicates renewed interest in a regular coitally-dependent method of oral contraception. We evaluated the existing data on safety and effectiveness of pericoital use of levonorgestrel and other hormonal drugs to prevent pregnancy.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 34 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 129 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Portugal 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Unknown 127 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 19 15%
Student > Master 19 15%
Researcher 17 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 9%
Other 8 6%
Other 25 19%
Unknown 30 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 50 39%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 10%
Social Sciences 8 6%
Unspecified 5 4%
Psychology 5 4%
Other 14 11%
Unknown 34 26%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 28. 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 21 December 2020.
All research outputs
#858,975
of 17,366,233 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#2,245
of 11,660 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12,050
of 217,249 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#50
of 225 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,366,233 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,660 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 25.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% 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 217,249 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 225 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.