| Title |
Propofol versus midazolam with or without short-acting opioids for sedation in colonoscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of safety, satisfaction, and efficiency outcomes
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, May 2020
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.gie.2019.12.047 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Fahima Dossa, Braeden Medeiros, Christine Keng, Sergio A. Acuna, Nancy N. Baxter |
Twitter Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 38 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 8 | 21% |
| Canada | 6 | 16% |
| United Kingdom | 4 | 11% |
| Spain | 3 | 8% |
| Colombia | 1 | 3% |
| El Salvador | 1 | 3% |
| Ecuador | 1 | 3% |
| Philippines | 1 | 3% |
| Czechia | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 3 | 8% |
| Unknown | 9 | 24% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 27 | 71% |
| Scientists | 7 | 18% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 4 | 11% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 36 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 6 | 17% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 6 | 17% |
| Researcher | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 4 | 11% |
| Unknown | 12 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 15 | 42% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 6% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 1 | 3% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 3% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Unknown | 14 | 39% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 24. 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 08 June 2020.
All research outputs
#1,446,334
of 23,873,054 outputs
Outputs from Gastrointestinal Endoscopy
#269
of 5,216 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#39,133
of 381,406 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Gastrointestinal Endoscopy
#20
of 102 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,873,054 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,216 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 381,406 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 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 102 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.