| Title |
Universal weekly testing as the UK COVID-19 lockdown exit strategy
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
The Lancet, May 2020
|
| DOI | 10.1016/s0140-6736(20)30936-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Julian Peto, Nisreen A Alwan, Keith M Godfrey, Rochelle A Burgess, David J Hunter, Elio Riboli, Paul Romer, Iain Buchan, Tim Colbourn, Céire Costelloe, George Davey Smith, Paul Elliott, Majid Ezzati, Ruth Gilbert, Mark S Gilthorpe, Robbie Foy, Richard Houlston, Hazel Inskip, Deborah A Lawlor, Adrian R Martineau, Nuala McGrath, David McCoy, Martin Mckee, Klim McPherson, Miriam Orcutt, Bharat Pankhania, Neil Pearce, Richard Peto, Andrew Phillips, Jugnoo Rahi, Paul Roderick, Sonia Saxena, Ann Wilson, Guiqing Lily Yao |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 269 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 45 | 17% |
| United States | 20 | 7% |
| United Kingdom | 9 | 3% |
| Ecuador | 8 | 3% |
| Brazil | 7 | 3% |
| Spain | 6 | 2% |
| Saudi Arabia | 3 | 1% |
| Finland | 2 | <1% |
| Switzerland | 2 | <1% |
| Other | 12 | 4% |
| Unknown | 155 | 58% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 241 | 90% |
| Scientists | 19 | 7% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 6 | 2% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 3 | 1% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 272 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 272 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 38 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 29 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 28 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 23 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 17 | 6% |
| Other | 72 | 26% |
| Unknown | 65 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 80 | 29% |
| Social Sciences | 18 | 7% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 14 | 5% |
| Engineering | 12 | 4% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 11 | 4% |
| Other | 62 | 23% |
| Unknown | 75 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 332. 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 27 June 2023.
All research outputs
#97,104
of 24,953,268 outputs
Outputs from The Lancet
#1,407
of 42,308 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,246
of 383,076 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The Lancet
#96
of 386 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,953,268 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 42,308 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 67.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 383,076 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 386 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.