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 |
Individualised antibiotic dosing for patients who are critically ill: challenges and potential solutions
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Lancet Infectious Diseases, April 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1016/s1473-3099(14)70036-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jason A Roberts, Mohd H Abdul-Aziz, Jeffrey Lipman, Johan W Mouton, Alexander A Vinks, Timothy W Felton, William W Hope, Andras Farkas, Michael N Neely, Jerome J Schentag, George Drusano, Otto R Frey, Ursula Theuretzbacher, Joseph L Kuti, on behalf of The International Society of Anti-Infective Pharmacology and the Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics Study Group of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 61 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 10 | 16% |
| United Kingdom | 10 | 16% |
| United States | 10 | 16% |
| Australia | 2 | 3% |
| New Zealand | 2 | 3% |
| Poland | 1 | 2% |
| Ireland | 1 | 2% |
| Ukraine | 1 | 2% |
| Belgium | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 22 | 36% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 40 | 66% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 12 | 20% |
| Scientists | 8 | 13% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 2% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 593 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | <1% |
| France | 3 | <1% |
| Germany | 2 | <1% |
| Brazil | 2 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Italy | 1 | <1% |
| Belgium | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 578 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 88 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 80 | 13% |
| Researcher | 73 | 12% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 53 | 9% |
| Other | 47 | 8% |
| Other | 130 | 22% |
| Unknown | 122 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 230 | 39% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 110 | 19% |
| Chemistry | 20 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 19 | 3% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 12 | 2% |
| Other | 59 | 10% |
| Unknown | 143 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 61. 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 23 November 2021.
All research outputs
#706,204
of 25,837,817 outputs
Outputs from Lancet Infectious Diseases
#1,076
of 6,088 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,301
of 243,681 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Lancet Infectious Diseases
#7
of 64 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,837,817 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 6,088 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 93.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 243,681 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 64 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.