The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 16 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
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 |
Did René Descartes have a giant ethmoidal sinus osteoma?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
The Lancet, October 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1016/s0140-6736(14)61816-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Philippe Charlier, Philippe Froesch, Nadia Benmoussa, Alain Froment, Russell Shorto, Isabelle Huynh-Charlier |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 3 | 19% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 13% |
| Kuwait | 1 | 6% |
| United States | 1 | 6% |
| Argentina | 1 | 6% |
| New Zealand | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 7 | 44% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 13 | 81% |
| Scientists | 2 | 13% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 6% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 12 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 12 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 2 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 17% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 2 | 17% |
| Researcher | 1 | 8% |
| Other | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 2 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 17% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 17% |
| Psychology | 1 | 8% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 8% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 8% |
| Other | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 4 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 28. 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 14 January 2015.
All research outputs
#1,378,510
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from The Lancet
#9,821
of 42,665 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,994
of 265,641 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The Lancet
#185
of 536 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 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 42,665 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 67.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% 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 265,641 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 536 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 65% of its contemporaries.