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 |
Clinical Consequences of a Miscalibrated Digoxin Immunoassay
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Therapeutic Drug Monitoring, February 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1097/ftd.0000000000000118 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Aaron E. Lim, Jillian R. Tate, David Clarke, Ross L. Norris, Raymond G. Morris, Jennifer H. Martin |
| Abstract |
A routine audit revealed that the analytical method used to measure digoxin concentrations by our State-wide pathology provider in 2009 was underestimating digoxin concentrations by 10%. The assay was recalibrated by the manufacturer in 2010 but clinical outcomes of the underestimation were never measured. This is a pilot study to describe the prescribing behaviour around out of range digoxin concentrations, and to assess if miscalibrated digoxin immunoassays contribute to clinically relevant effects as measured by inappropriate alterations in digoxin doses. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 | 1 | 33% |
| Canada | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 14 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 14 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 21% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 14% |
| Professor | 2 | 14% |
| Other | 1 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 7% |
| Other | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 4 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 29% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 4 | 29% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 5 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 January 2015.
All research outputs
#16,047,334
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Therapeutic Drug Monitoring
#922
of 1,787 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#200,996
of 361,169 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Therapeutic Drug Monitoring
#6
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,787 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 361,169 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 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 60% of its contemporaries.