↓ Skip to main content

Diagnosing COVID-19 infection: the danger of over-reliance on positive test results

Overview of attention for article published in medRxiv
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#34 of 15,533)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
57 news outlets
blogs
5 blogs
policy
1 policy source
twitter
4735 tweeters
facebook
2 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
30 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
18 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
Diagnosing COVID-19 infection: the danger of over-reliance on positive test results
Published in
medRxiv
DOI 10.1101/2020.04.26.20080911
Authors

Cohen, Andrew N, Kessel, Bruce, Milgroom, Michael G

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4,735 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 18 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 18 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 3 17%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 11%
Librarian 2 11%
Student > Bachelor 2 11%
Unspecified 1 6%
Other 7 39%
Unknown 1 6%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 28%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 6%
Environmental Science 1 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 6%
Other 6 33%
Unknown 3 17%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3497. 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 18 January 2021.
All research outputs
#644
of 16,636,435 outputs
Outputs from medRxiv
#34
of 15,533 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#91
of 379,382 outputs
Outputs of similar age from medRxiv
#5
of 2,137 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 16,636,435 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 15,533 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 54.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 379,382 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 2,137 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.