| Title |
Procalcitonin levels in candidemia versus bacteremia: a systematic review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Critical Care, May 2019
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13054-019-2481-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Andrea Cortegiani, Giovanni Misseri, Mariachiara Ippolito, Matteo Bassetti, Antonino Giarratano, Ignacio Martin-Loeches, Sharon Einav |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 75 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Mexico | 5 | 7% |
| Colombia | 4 | 5% |
| Spain | 4 | 5% |
| United States | 3 | 4% |
| United Kingdom | 3 | 4% |
| India | 2 | 3% |
| Japan | 2 | 3% |
| Germany | 2 | 3% |
| Chile | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 15 | 20% |
| Unknown | 33 | 44% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 52 | 69% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 15 | 20% |
| Scientists | 6 | 8% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 3% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 93 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 93 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 16 | 17% |
| Researcher | 8 | 9% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 7 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 8% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 6% |
| Other | 18 | 19% |
| Unknown | 31 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 40 | 43% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 2% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 2% |
| Engineering | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 5 | 5% |
| Unknown | 38 | 41% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 43. 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 15 July 2023.
All research outputs
#965,970
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#747
of 6,555 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,313
of 364,187 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#23
of 130 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,555 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 364,187 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 130 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.