| Title |
Trifluoperazine versus low‐potency first‐generation antipsychotic drugs for schizophrenia
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd009396.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Magdolna Tardy, Markus Dold, Rolf R Engel, Stefan Leucht |
| Abstract |
Antipsychotic drugs are the core treatment for schizophrenia. Treatment guidelines state that there is no difference in efficacy between any other antipsychotic compounds, however, low-potency antipsychotic drugs are often perceived as less efficacious than high-potency compounds by clinicians, and they also seem to differ in their side-effects. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 33% |
| India | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 3 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 83% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 120 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 2% |
| Unknown | 118 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 21 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 18 | 15% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 12 | 10% |
| Researcher | 9 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 7% |
| Other | 19 | 16% |
| Unknown | 33 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 31 | 26% |
| Psychology | 17 | 14% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 11 | 9% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 8 | 7% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 8 | 7% |
| Unknown | 42 | 35% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 05 August 2020.
All research outputs
#2,842,113
of 25,959,914 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#5,525
of 13,168 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#27,424
of 243,931 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#101
of 233 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,959,914 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,168 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% 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 243,931 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 233 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 56% of its contemporaries.