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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Addition of infliximab compared with addition of sulfasalazine and hydroxychloroquine to methotrexate in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis (Swefot trial): 1-year results of a randomised trial
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
The Lancet, August 2009
|
| DOI | 10.1016/s0140-6736(09)60944-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
RF van Vollenhoven, S Ernestam, P Geborek, IF Petersson, L Cöster, E Waltbrand, A Zickert, J Theander, Å Thörner, H Hellström, A Teleman, C Dackhammar, F Akre, K Forslind, L Ljung, R Oding, A Chatzidionysiou, M Wörnert, J Bratt |
| Abstract |
New treatment strategies for early rheumatoid arthritis are evolving rapidly. We aimed to compare addition of conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (sulfasalazine and hydroxychloroquine) with addition of a tumour necrosis factor antagonist (infliximab) to methotrexate in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 178 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 3 | 2% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 1% |
| Finland | 1 | <1% |
| Colombia | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Singapore | 1 | <1% |
| China | 1 | <1% |
| Japan | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 166 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 25 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 23 | 13% |
| Other | 19 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 18 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 18 | 10% |
| Other | 57 | 32% |
| Unknown | 18 | 10% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 115 | 65% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 13 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 9 | 5% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 7 | 4% |
| Chemistry | 2 | 1% |
| Other | 10 | 6% |
| Unknown | 22 | 12% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. 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 13 January 2021.
All research outputs
#2,254,924
of 26,017,215 outputs
Outputs from The Lancet
#13,435
of 43,155 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#7,604
of 126,758 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The Lancet
#63
of 198 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,017,215 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 43,155 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 gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% 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 126,758 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 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 198 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 67% of its contemporaries.