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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Tea consumption didn’t modify the risk of fracture: a dose–response meta-analysis of observational studies
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Diagnostic Pathology, March 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1746-1596-9-44 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Bo Chen, Hai-Fei Shi, Shou-Cheng Wu |
| Abstract |
Fractures are important causes of healthy damage and economic loss nowadays. The conclusions of observational studies on tea consumption and fracture risk are still inconsistent. The objective of this meta-analysis is to determine the effect of tea drinking on the risk of fractures. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 25 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 25 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 6 | 24% |
| Researcher | 6 | 24% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 16% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 3 | 12% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 40% |
| Computer Science | 3 | 12% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 4% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 2 | 8% |
| Unknown | 6 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 21 September 2022.
All research outputs
#2,426,643
of 23,381,576 outputs
Outputs from Diagnostic Pathology
#30
of 1,150 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#25,500
of 223,166 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Diagnostic Pathology
#1
of 52 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,381,576 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,150 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 223,166 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 52 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 98% of its contemporaries.