↓ Skip to main content

Vaginal Prolapse Repair—Native Tissue Repair versus Mesh Augmentation: Newer Isn’t Always Better

Overview of attention for article published in Current Bladder Dysfunction Reports, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (61st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (71st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
6 Mendeley
Title
Vaginal Prolapse Repair—Native Tissue Repair versus Mesh Augmentation: Newer Isn’t Always Better
Published in
Current Bladder Dysfunction Reports, January 2013
DOI 10.1007/s11884-012-0170-7
Authors

Shunaha Kim-Fine, John A. Occhino, John B. Gebhart

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 6 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 6 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 33%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 33%
Student > Master 1 17%
Professor > Associate Professor 1 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 3 50%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 33%
Social Sciences 1 17%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 October 2014.
All research outputs
#6,416,154
of 12,474,696 outputs
Outputs from Current Bladder Dysfunction Reports
#22
of 83 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#66,640
of 175,917 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Bladder Dysfunction Reports
#2
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,474,696 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 83 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 175,917 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 61% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 5 of them.