↓ Skip to main content

Intra‐pleural fibrinolytic therapy versus conservative management in the treatment of adult parapneumonic effusions and empyema

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2008
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
143 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
136 Mendeley
citeulike
2 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
Intra‐pleural fibrinolytic therapy versus conservative management in the treatment of adult parapneumonic effusions and empyema
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2008
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd002312.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Robert J Cameron, Huw Richard H R Davies

Abstract

Pleural effusions and empyema may complicate lower respiratory tract infections. Treatment of these collections of pus includes surgical drainage and the use of intra-pleural fibrinolysis to break down fibrin bands that may cause loculation.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 136 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 2 1%
India 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 132 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 21 15%
Researcher 18 13%
Other 17 13%
Student > Master 15 11%
Student > Bachelor 10 7%
Other 27 20%
Unknown 28 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 86 63%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 4%
Psychology 3 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 1%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 1%
Other 4 3%
Unknown 34 25%
Attention Score in Context

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 09 February 2018.
All research outputs
#15,576,527
of 25,457,297 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#10,096
of 11,499 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#78,138
of 92,972 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#49
of 54 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,297 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,499 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 40.0. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% 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 92,972 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 54 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.