↓ Skip to main content

Mechanical bowel preparation for elective colorectal surgery

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, September 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (68th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
6 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
336 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
254 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
Mechanical bowel preparation for elective colorectal surgery
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, September 2011
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd001544.pub4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Katia F Güenaga, Delcio Matos, Peer Wille-Jørgensen

Abstract

The presence of bowel contents during colorectal surgery has been related to anastomotic leakage, but the belief that mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) is an efficient agent against leakage and infectious complications is based on observational data and expert opinions only.An enema before the rectal surgery to clean the rectum and facilitate the manipulation for the mechanical anastomosis is used for many surgeons. This is analysed separately

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 254 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Italy 4 2%
Brazil 1 <1%
Chile 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 245 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 39 15%
Other 32 13%
Student > Master 31 12%
Student > Postgraduate 28 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 9%
Other 72 28%
Unknown 28 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 180 71%
Nursing and Health Professions 14 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 2%
Social Sciences 4 2%
Engineering 2 <1%
Other 10 4%
Unknown 38 15%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 16 November 2019.
All research outputs
#4,481,960
of 15,038,142 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#7,303
of 11,083 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#31,977
of 101,890 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#27
of 49 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,038,142 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,083 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 22.7. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% 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 101,890 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 49 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.