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 |
Antibacterial honey for the prevention of peritoneal-dialysis-related infections (HONEYPOT): a randomised trial
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Lancet Infectious Diseases, October 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1016/s1473-3099(13)70258-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
David W Johnson, Sunil V Badve, Elaine M Pascoe, Elaine Beller, Alan Cass, Carolyn Clark, Janak de Zoysa, Nicole M Isbel, Steven McTaggart, Alicia T Morrish, E Geoffrey Playford, Anish Scaria, Paul Snelling, Liza A Vergara, Carmel M Hawley, for the HONEYPOT Study Collaborative Group |
| Abstract |
There is a paucity of evidence to guide the best strategy for prevention of peritoneal-dialysis-related infections. Antibacterial honey has shown promise as a novel, cheap, effective, topical prophylactic agent without inducing microbial resistance. We therefore assessed whether daily application of honey at the exit site would increase the time to peritoneal-dialysis-related infections compared with standard exit-site care plus intranasal mupirocin prophylaxis for nasal carriers of Staphylococcus aureus. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 50 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 | 7 | 14% |
| United Kingdom | 6 | 12% |
| Japan | 4 | 8% |
| Canada | 2 | 4% |
| Spain | 2 | 4% |
| Australia | 1 | 2% |
| Ireland | 1 | 2% |
| Saudi Arabia | 1 | 2% |
| India | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 6% |
| Unknown | 22 | 44% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 32 | 64% |
| Scientists | 8 | 16% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 7 | 14% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 3 | 6% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 157 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Portugal | 1 | <1% |
| Sweden | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| India | 1 | <1% |
| Slovenia | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 148 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 20 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 19 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 19 | 12% |
| Researcher | 17 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 16 | 10% |
| Other | 36 | 23% |
| Unknown | 30 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 65 | 41% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 15 | 10% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 11 | 7% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 5 | 3% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 4 | 3% |
| Other | 20 | 13% |
| Unknown | 37 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 82. 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 29 July 2023.
All research outputs
#525,598
of 25,628,260 outputs
Outputs from Lancet Infectious Diseases
#883
of 6,079 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,196
of 223,422 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Lancet Infectious Diseases
#8
of 72 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,628,260 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 6,079 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 93.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% 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 223,422 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 72 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 90% of its contemporaries.