↓ Skip to main content

Antibiotic adjuvant therapy for pulmonary infection in cystic fibrosis

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, June 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (83rd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 tweeters
facebook
2 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

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.
Title
Antibiotic adjuvant therapy for pulmonary infection in cystic fibrosis
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, June 2013
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd008037.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Matthew N Hurley, Douglas L Forrester, Alan R Smyth

Abstract

Cystic fibrosis is a multi-system disease characterised by the production of thick secretions causing recurrent pulmonary infection, often with unusual bacteria. This leads to lung destruction and eventually death through respiratory failure. There are no antibiotics in development that exert a new mode of action and many of the current antibiotics are ineffective in eradicating the bacteria once chronic infection is established. Antibiotic adjuvants - therapies that act by rendering the organism more susceptible to attack by antibiotics or the host immune system, by rendering it less virulent or killing it by other means, are urgently needed.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

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.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Unknown 113 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 23 20%
Student > Bachelor 20 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 8%
Researcher 8 7%
Other 20 17%
Unknown 20 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 47 41%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 6%
Psychology 6 5%
Social Sciences 4 3%
Other 15 13%
Unknown 24 21%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 20 March 2018.
All research outputs
#1,951,248
of 12,680,099 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#4,722
of 10,395 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#24,275
of 149,713 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#53
of 142 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,680,099 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,395 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% 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 149,713 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 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 142 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 62% of its contemporaries.