| Title |
The pharmaceutical practice of mask distribution by pharmacists in Taiwan’s community pharmacies under the Mask Real-Name System, in response to the COVID-19 outbreak
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation, October 2020
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12962-020-00239-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Che-huei Lin, Ya-Wen Lin, Jong-yi Wang, Ming-hung Lin |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 149 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 22 | 15% |
| United Kingdom | 9 | 6% |
| Spain | 7 | 5% |
| Australia | 4 | 3% |
| France | 3 | 2% |
| Switzerland | 3 | 2% |
| Canada | 3 | 2% |
| Netherlands | 2 | 1% |
| South Africa | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 7 | 5% |
| Unknown | 88 | 59% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 136 | 91% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 9 | 6% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 1% |
| Scientists | 2 | 1% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 67 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 67 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 10 | 15% |
| Other | 8 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 4% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 4% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 10 | 15% |
| Unknown | 30 | 45% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 9 | 13% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 12% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 9% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 6% |
| Psychology | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 9 | 13% |
| Unknown | 28 | 42% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 103. 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 01 December 2021.
All research outputs
#417,756
of 25,736,439 outputs
Outputs from Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation
#5
of 548 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12,044
of 440,517 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation
#1
of 25 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,736,439 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 548 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.8. 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 440,517 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 25 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 96% of its contemporaries.