↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

High‐flux versus low‐flux membranes for end‐stage kidney disease

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, September 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
67 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
207 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
High‐flux versus low‐flux membranes for end‐stage kidney disease
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, September 2012
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd005016.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Suetonia C Palmer, Kannaiyan S Rabindranath, Jonathan C Craig, Paul J Roderick, Francesco Locatelli, Giovanni FM Strippoli

Abstract

Clinical practice guidelines regarding the use of high-flux haemodialysis membranes vary widely.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 207 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Chile 1 <1%
Singapore 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 199 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 48 23%
Student > Bachelor 29 14%
Researcher 21 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 7%
Student > Postgraduate 9 4%
Other 29 14%
Unknown 56 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 76 37%
Nursing and Health Professions 18 9%
Psychology 7 3%
Engineering 7 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 3%
Other 26 13%
Unknown 67 32%
Attention Score in Context

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 03 October 2012.
All research outputs
#17,348,916
of 25,457,297 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#10,493
of 11,499 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#124,041
of 187,469 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#193
of 218 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,297 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% 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 6th percentile – i.e., 6% 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 187,469 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 218 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.