↓ Skip to main content

Artificial corneas versus donor corneas for repeat corneal transplants

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

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
74 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
Artificial corneas versus donor corneas for repeat corneal transplants
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, November 2014
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd009561.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Esen K Akpek, Majed Alkharashi, Frank S Hwang, Sueko M Ng, Kristina Lindsley

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 74 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Korea, Republic of 1 1%
Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of 1 1%
Unknown 70 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 12 16%
Student > Master 12 16%
Researcher 12 16%
Other 8 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 9%
Other 23 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 32 43%
Unspecified 19 26%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 4%
Other 8 11%

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 26 December 2015.
All research outputs
#3,517,330
of 12,527,219 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#6,125
of 8,923 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#80,368
of 275,268 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#178
of 233 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,527,219 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
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 37th percentile – i.e., 37% 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 275,268 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 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 233 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.