↓ Skip to main content

Lung transplantation from donation after cardiocirculatory death: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Heart & Lung Transplantation, November 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (71st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
guideline
1 clinical guideline source

Readers on

mendeley
114 Mendeley
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.
Article details
Title
Lung transplantation from donation after cardiocirculatory death: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Published in
Journal of Heart & Lung Transplantation, November 2014
DOI 10.1016/j.healun.2014.11.009
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Lung transplantation (LTx) can extend life expectancy and enhance the quality of life for select patients with end-stage lung disease. In the setting of donor lung shortage and waiting list mortality, the interest in donation after cardiocirculatory death (DCD) is increasing. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare outcomes between DCD and conventional donation after brain death (DBD).

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 114 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Norway 1 <1%
Unknown 113 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 11%
Researcher 13 11%
Student > Bachelor 12 11%
Other 9 8%
Other 26 23%
Unknown 27 24%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 66 58%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 3%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 2%
Other 3 3%
Unknown 33 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 01 February 2025.
All research outputs
#9,222,477
of 34,364,397 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Heart & Lung Transplantation
#1,640
of 4,769 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#80,838
of 305,079 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Heart & Lung Transplantation
#21
of 74 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,364,397 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,769 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% 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 305,079 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 74 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 71% of its contemporaries.