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 |
Immunosuppressive T‐cell antibody induction for heart transplant recipients
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd008842.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Luit Penninga, Christian H Møller, Finn Gustafsson, Christian Gluud, Daniel A Steinbrüchel |
| Abstract |
Heart transplantation has become a valuable and well-accepted treatment option for end-stage heart failure. Rejection of the transplanted heart by the recipient's body is a risk to the success of the procedure, and life-long immunosuppression is necessary to avoid this. Clear evidence is required to identify the best, safest and most effective immunosuppressive treatment strategy for heart transplant recipients. To date, there is no consensus on the use of immunosuppressive antibodies against T-cells for induction after heart transplantation. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 221 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 2 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 218 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 36 | 16% |
| Researcher | 26 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 21 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 17 | 8% |
| Other | 15 | 7% |
| Other | 39 | 18% |
| Unknown | 67 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 93 | 42% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 18 | 8% |
| Psychology | 8 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 2% |
| Neuroscience | 4 | 2% |
| Other | 20 | 9% |
| Unknown | 74 | 33% |
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 28 January 2014.
All research outputs
#20,723,696
of 25,457,858 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#10,914
of 11,499 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#246,131
of 321,322 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#211
of 220 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,858 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% 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 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 321,322 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 220 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.