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 |
Alternative Viewpoint: Efficacy and Effectiveness of Respiratory Syncytial Virus Immunoprophylaxis in Children with Cystic Fibrosis – An Unsolved Question with More to Be Asked
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Pharmacotherapy, October 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1002/phar.2029 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Rees L. Lee, Rebekah F. Brown, Tebeb Gebretsadik, Tina V. Hartert, William D. Dupont, Pingsheng Wu |
| Abstract |
The systematic review of the safety and efficacy of palivizumab in children with cystic fibrosis (CF) by Kua and Lee(1) demonstrates the woeful lack of definitive data in this area and correctly points out the critical need for additional well-designed studies. Their review examined 10 scientific reports and concluded that respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) immunoprophylaxis "may have a potential role in reducing RSV hospitalizations in children aged less than 2 years with CF".(1) While we fully agree with the authors' non-committal conclusions, it is important to highlight the extreme caution that must be exercised in interpreting this literature. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 56 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 56 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 4% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 1 | 2% |
| Professor | 1 | 2% |
| Student > Master | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 50 | 89% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 5% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 2% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 2% |
| Engineering | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 50 | 89% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 02 March 2019.
All research outputs
#19,951,180
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Pharmacotherapy
#2,207
of 2,502 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#246,876
of 338,126 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Pharmacotherapy
#40
of 49 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,502 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.1. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% 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 338,126 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 49 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.