↓ Skip to main content

Linezolid versus vancomycin for skin and soft tissue infections.

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (83rd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
13 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
49 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
Linezolid versus vancomycin for skin and soft tissue infections.
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2013
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd008056.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yue J, Dong BR, Yang M, Chen X, Wu T, Liu GJ, Jirong Yue, Bi Rong Dong, Ming Yang, Xiaomei Chen, Taixiang Wu, Guan J Liu

Abstract

The morbidity and treatment costs associated with skin and soft tissue infections (SSTIs) are high. Linezolid and vancomycin are antibiotics that are commonly used in treating skin and soft-tissue infections, specifically those infections due to methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA).

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 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 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 3 6%
Mexico 1 2%
United States 1 2%
Ireland 1 2%
Unknown 43 88%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 9 18%
Researcher 7 14%
Student > Master 5 10%
Student > Bachelor 5 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 8%
Other 12 24%
Unknown 7 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 22 45%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 10%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 8%
Psychology 3 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 6%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 9 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 16 January 2017.
All research outputs
#4,214,495
of 25,390,970 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#6,679
of 12,525 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#34,248
of 206,823 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#174
of 317 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,390,970 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,525 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 37.2. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% 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 206,823 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 317 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.