↓ Skip to main content

Nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy compared to standard radical hysterectomy for women with early stage cervical cancer (stage Ia2 to IIa)

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, February 2019
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 tweeters
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
84 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
Nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy compared to standard radical hysterectomy for women with early stage cervical cancer (stage Ia2 to IIa)
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, February 2019
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd012828.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Chumnan Kietpeerakool, Apiwat Aue-aungkul, Khadra Galaal, Chetta Ngamjarus, Pisake Lumbiganon

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 84 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 84 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 12 14%
Student > Master 11 13%
Student > Postgraduate 10 12%
Student > Bachelor 9 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 10%
Other 14 17%
Unknown 20 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 27 32%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 15%
Social Sciences 7 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 4%
Other 9 11%
Unknown 22 26%

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 02 December 2019.
All research outputs
#4,928,578
of 16,097,522 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#7,644
of 11,396 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#126,116
of 343,958 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#25
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 16,097,522 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,396 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 23.8. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% 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 343,958 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 62% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.