↓ Skip to main content

Surgical versus medical interventions for chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps

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

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (81st percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page
f1000
1 research highlight platform

Citations

dimensions_citation
54 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
159 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 versus medical interventions for chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2014
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd006991.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Joanne Rimmer, Wytske Fokkens, Lee Yee Chong, Claire Hopkins

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 159 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Portugal 1 <1%
Ukraine 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Iran, Islamic Republic of 1 <1%
Unknown 155 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 33 21%
Student > Master 23 14%
Student > Postgraduate 21 13%
Unspecified 16 10%
Student > Bachelor 16 10%
Other 50 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 104 65%
Unspecified 21 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 3%
Other 18 11%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 13 September 2016.
All research outputs
#2,195,236
of 12,527,219 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#4,725
of 8,923 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#52,578
of 287,784 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#138
of 230 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 78th 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 has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% 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 287,784 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 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 230 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.