↓ Skip to main content

Erratum to: Emotional impact of screening: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, September 2011
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
5 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
Erratum to: Emotional impact of screening: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Published in
BMC Public Health, September 2011
DOI 10.1186/1471-2458-11-752
Authors

Ruth E Collins, Laureen M Lopez, Theresa M Marteau

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 5 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 5 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 20%
Student > Bachelor 1 20%
Unknown 3 60%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 1 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 20%
Unknown 3 60%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 2011.
All research outputs
#18,297,449
of 22,653,392 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#12,748
of 14,735 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#109,452
of 131,667 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#182
of 200 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,653,392 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,735 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 131,667 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 200 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.