↓ Skip to main content

Common harms from amoxicillin: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized placebo-controlled trials for any indication

Overview of attention for article published in Canadian Medical Association Journal, November 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (93rd percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
113 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
195 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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.
Title
Common harms from amoxicillin: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized placebo-controlled trials for any indication
Published in
Canadian Medical Association Journal, November 2014
DOI 10.1503/cmaj.140848
Pubmed ID
Authors

Malcolm Gillies, Anggi Ranakusuma, Tammy Hoffmann, Sarah Thorning, Treasure McGuire, Paul Glasziou, Christopher Del Mar

Abstract

When prescribing antibiotics for common indications, clinicians need information about both harms and benefits, information that is currently available only from observational studies. We quantified the common harms of the most frequently prescribed antibiotic, amoxicillin, from randomized placebo-controlled trials.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 101 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 195 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 2 1%
United States 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 191 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 30 15%
Researcher 29 15%
Student > Master 21 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 7%
Other 12 6%
Other 35 18%
Unknown 54 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 62 32%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 11 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 5%
Other 32 16%
Unknown 62 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 124. 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 18 December 2023.
All research outputs
#340,636
of 25,576,275 outputs
Outputs from Canadian Medical Association Journal
#613
of 9,504 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,745
of 369,045 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Canadian Medical Association Journal
#8
of 111 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,576,275 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,504 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 34.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 369,045 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 111 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 93% of its contemporaries.