| Title |
Evidence for the Efficacy of NXY-059 in Experimental Focal Cerebral Ischaemia Is Confounded by Study Quality
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Stroke, July 2008
|
| DOI | 10.1161/strokeaha.108.515957 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Malcolm R. Macleod, H Bart van der Worp, Emily S. Sena, David W. Howells, Ulrich Dirnagl, Geoffrey A. Donnan |
| Abstract |
The neutral results of the SAINT II trial have again highlighted difficulties translating neuroprotective efficacy from bench to bedside. Animal studies are susceptible to study quality biases, which may lead to overstatement of efficacy. We report the impact of study quality on published estimates of the efficacy of NXY-059 in animal models of stroke. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 1 | 50% |
| Canada | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 139 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Russia | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 135 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 23 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 20 | 14% |
| Researcher | 19 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 18 | 13% |
| Other | 11 | 8% |
| Other | 30 | 22% |
| Unknown | 18 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 41 | 29% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 24 | 17% |
| Neuroscience | 14 | 10% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 9 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 6 | 4% |
| Other | 18 | 13% |
| Unknown | 27 | 19% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 35. 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 19 January 2021.
All research outputs
#1,147,294
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Stroke
#1,023
of 12,373 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,255
of 86,653 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Stroke
#4
of 73 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 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 12,373 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 86,653 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 73 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.