↓ Skip to main content

Screening for lung cancer

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2004
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
56 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
3 Mendeley
connotea
2 Connotea
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
Screening for lung cancer
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2004
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd001991.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Manser RL, Irving LB, Stone C, Byrnes G, Abramson M, Campbell D, Manser, Renée, Irving, Louis B, Stone, Christine, Byrnes, Graham, Abramson, Michael J, Campbell, Donald

Abstract

While population based screening for lung cancer has not been adopted by most countries, it is not clear whether sputum examinations, chest radiography or newer methods such as computed tomography are effective in reducing mortality from lung cancer.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 3 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 3 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 4 133%
Student > Bachelor 2 67%
Student > Postgraduate 1 33%
Student > Master 1 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Unspecified 4 133%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 67%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 33%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 33%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 20 February 2014.
All research outputs
#9,194,637
of 15,666,478 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#9,138
of 11,236 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#109,226
of 219,102 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#398
of 516 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,666,478 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,236 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 23.3. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% 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 219,102 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 516 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.