| Title |
The optimal choice of medication administration route regarding intravenous, intramuscular, and subcutaneous injection
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Patient preference and adherence, July 2015
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ppa.s87271 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jing-fen Jin, Ling-ling Zhu, Meng Chen, Hui-min Xu, Hua-fen Wang, Xiu-qin Feng, Xiu-ping Zhu, Quan Zhou |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 18 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 | 5 | 28% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 11% |
| Italy | 2 | 11% |
| Germany | 1 | 6% |
| Romania | 1 | 6% |
| Jordan | 1 | 6% |
| Malaysia | 1 | 6% |
| India | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 4 | 22% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 9 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 7 | 39% |
| Scientists | 2 | 11% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 647 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Italy | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 643 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 103 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 77 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 76 | 12% |
| Researcher | 63 | 10% |
| Other | 43 | 7% |
| Other | 98 | 15% |
| Unknown | 187 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 89 | 14% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 75 | 12% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 61 | 9% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 42 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 32 | 5% |
| Other | 136 | 21% |
| Unknown | 212 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 31. 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 19 March 2024.
All research outputs
#1,291,470
of 25,810,956 outputs
Outputs from Patient preference and adherence
#49
of 1,769 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,345
of 278,409 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Patient preference and adherence
#1
of 51 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,810,956 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,769 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. 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 278,409 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 51 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.