↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

HMG CoA reductase inhibitors (statins) for dialysis patients

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, September 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 (92nd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (63rd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
23 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
98 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
221 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
HMG CoA reductase inhibitors (statins) for dialysis patients
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, September 2013
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd004289.pub5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Suetonia C Palmer, Sankar D Navaneethan, Jonathan C Craig, David W Johnson, Vlado Perkovic, Sagar U Nigwekar, Jorgen Hegbrant, Giovanni FM Strippoli

Abstract

People with advanced kidney disease treated with dialysis experience mortality rates from cardiovascular disease that are substantially higher than for the general population. Studies that have assessed the benefits of statins (HMG CoA reductase inhibitors) report conflicting conclusions for people on dialysis and existing meta-analyses have not had sufficient power to determine whether the effects of statins vary with severity of kidney disease. Recently, additional data for the effects of statins in dialysis patients have become available. This is an update of a review first published in 2004 and last updated in 2009.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 23 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 221 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
India 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Unknown 218 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 37 17%
Student > Bachelor 28 13%
Researcher 17 8%
Student > Postgraduate 17 8%
Other 15 7%
Other 46 21%
Unknown 61 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 97 44%
Nursing and Health Professions 19 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 8 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 3%
Psychology 6 3%
Other 16 7%
Unknown 69 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 22. 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 31 May 2022.
All research outputs
#1,741,157
of 25,457,297 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#3,721
of 11,499 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,100
of 211,004 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#84
of 232 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,297 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
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 has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% 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 211,004 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 232 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.