↓ Skip to main content

Antibiotics for Abdominal Sepsis

Overview of attention for article published in New England Journal of Medicine, May 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (63rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
twitter
24 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages
reddit
1 Redditor

Readers on

mendeley
115 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
Antibiotics for Abdominal Sepsis
Published in
New England Journal of Medicine, May 2015
DOI 10.1056/nejme1503936
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Major milestones in surgery have included safe sutures to promote tissue integrity, cautery to minimize bleeding, the use of anesthesia to avoid pain, and antisepsis to prevent operative contamination. In the antibiotic era, surgical procedures for source control in abdominal sepsis have been complemented with drugs targeting persistent organisms after luminal inflammation, obstruction, or perforation. The appropriate duration of postsurgical antibiotic therapy has been unclear.(1) However, if safe, shorter courses would be desirable to minimize drug-related adverse events, the selection of antibiotic resistance, and costs. In this issue of the Journal, Sawyer and colleagues(2) present data from the Study . . .

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 24 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 115 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 %
Japan 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Colombia 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 109 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 20 17%
Researcher 16 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 10%
Professor 10 9%
Student > Postgraduate 10 9%
Other 32 28%
Unknown 16 14%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 82 71%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 6 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 3%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 2 2%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 2%
Other 3 3%
Unknown 17 15%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 32. 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 06 July 2015.
All research outputs
#1,501,679
of 32,395,699 outputs
Outputs from New England Journal of Medicine
#12,767
of 37,320 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,299
of 299,540 outputs
Outputs of similar age from New England Journal of Medicine
#128
of 354 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 32,395,699 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 37,320 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 120.1. 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 299,540 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 354 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.