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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Continuous versus intermittent infusions of antibiotics for the treatment of severe acute infections
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, March 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd008481.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jennifer R Shiu, Erica Wang, Aaron M Tejani, Michael Wasdell |
| Abstract |
Intravenous broad-spectrum antibiotics are indicated for the treatment of severe infections. However, the emergence of infections caused by multi-drug resistant organisms in conjunction with a lack of novel antibiotics has prompted the investigation of alternative dosing strategies to improve clinical efficacy and tolerability. To optimise pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic antibiotic parameters, continuous antibiotic infusions have been compared to traditional intermittent antibiotic infusions. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 4 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 242 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 1 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| South Africa | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Mexico | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 236 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 31 | 13% |
| Researcher | 29 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 29 | 12% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 26 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 25 | 10% |
| Other | 53 | 22% |
| Unknown | 49 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 120 | 50% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 14 | 6% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 14 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 10 | 4% |
| Psychology | 7 | 3% |
| Other | 19 | 8% |
| Unknown | 58 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 04 November 2023.
All research outputs
#7,978,603
of 25,595,500 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#9,332
of 13,156 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#64,757
of 210,810 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#159
of 214 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,595,500 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,156 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.8. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% 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 210,810 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 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 214 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.