| Title |
Errors in determination of net survival: cause-specific and relative survival settings
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
British Journal of Cancer, February 2020
|
| DOI | 10.1038/s41416-020-0739-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Chloe J. Bright, Adam R. Brentnall, Kate Wooldrage, Jonathon Myles, Peter Sasieni, Stephen W. Duffy |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 Kingdom | 6 | 75% |
| Unknown | 2 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 50% |
| Scientists | 3 | 38% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 13% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 35 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 35 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 20% |
| Researcher | 4 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 11% |
| Professor | 2 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 5 | 14% |
| Unknown | 11 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 14 | 40% |
| Psychology | 2 | 6% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 3 | 9% |
| Unknown | 13 | 37% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 03 April 2021.
All research outputs
#6,408,526
of 23,192,960 outputs
Outputs from British Journal of Cancer
#4,504
of 10,529 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#138,796
of 455,714 outputs
Outputs of similar age from British Journal of Cancer
#47
of 108 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,192,960 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,529 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% 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 455,714 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 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 108 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its contemporaries.