↓ 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 (64th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
30 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
204 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

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 204 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 204 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 23 11%
Student > Master 20 10%
Researcher 16 8%
Other 13 6%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 6%
Other 38 19%
Unknown 82 40%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 53 26%
Nursing and Health Professions 22 11%
Social Sciences 7 3%
Unspecified 7 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 7 3%
Other 21 10%
Unknown 87 43%
Attention Score in Context

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
#7,336,528
of 23,128,387 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#8,869
of 12,376 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#157,791
of 447,271 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#147
of 178 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,128,387 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,376 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 32.4. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% 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 447,271 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 64% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 178 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.