| Title |
Laparoscopic Versus Open Resection for Rectal Cancer
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Annals of Surgery, May 2019
|
| DOI | 10.1097/sla.0000000000003072 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Sergio A. Acuna, Tyler R. Chesney, Joshua K. Ramjist, Prakesh S. Shah, Erin D. Kennedy, Nancy N. Baxter |
Twitter Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 32 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 7 | 22% |
| Canada | 5 | 16% |
| Mexico | 3 | 9% |
| United States | 3 | 9% |
| Colombia | 2 | 6% |
| New Zealand | 1 | 3% |
| Egypt | 1 | 3% |
| Saudi Arabia | 1 | 3% |
| Turkey | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Unknown | 6 | 19% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 12 | 38% |
| Members of the public | 12 | 38% |
| Scientists | 5 | 16% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 3 | 9% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 42 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 42 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 7 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 17% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 6 | 14% |
| Researcher | 6 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 3 | 7% |
| Unknown | 11 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 24 | 57% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 2% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 2% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 2% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 2 | 5% |
| Unknown | 12 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. 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 17 May 2019.
All research outputs
#1,982,142
of 23,980,099 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Surgery
#1,367
of 8,784 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#44,698
of 353,271 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Surgery
#58
of 155 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,980,099 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,784 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 353,271 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 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 155 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.