↓ Skip to main content

Central venous access devices for the delivery of systemic anticancer therapy (CAVA): a randomised controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in The Lancet, July 2021
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
4 news outlets
twitter
72 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
67 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
130 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
Central venous access devices for the delivery of systemic anticancer therapy (CAVA): a randomised controlled trial
Published in
The Lancet, July 2021
DOI 10.1016/s0140-6736(21)00766-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jonathan G Moss, Olivia Wu, Andrew R Bodenham, Roshan Agarwal, Tobias F Menne, Brian L Jones, Robert Heggie, Steve Hill, Judith Dixon-Hughes, Eileen Soulis, Evi Germeni, Susan Dillon, Elaine McCartney, CAVA trial group

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 72 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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 130 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 130 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 11 8%
Other 8 6%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 6%
Student > Master 7 5%
Student > Postgraduate 6 5%
Other 21 16%
Unknown 69 53%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 45 35%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 2%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 <1%
Computer Science 1 <1%
Other 3 2%
Unknown 67 52%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 75. 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 06 September 2023.
All research outputs
#613,578
of 26,579,895 outputs
Outputs from The Lancet
#5,328
of 43,684 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,280
of 451,427 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The Lancet
#115
of 388 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,579,895 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 43,684 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 68.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 451,427 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 388 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 70% of its contemporaries.