↓ Skip to main content

Chinese herbal medicine Huangqi type formulations for nephrotic syndrome

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

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (60th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters
facebook
4 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
60 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Chinese herbal medicine Huangqi type formulations for nephrotic syndrome
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, June 2013
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd006335.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mei Feng, Wei Yuan, Renzhong Zhang, Ping Fu, Taixiang Wu

Abstract

Patients with primary nephrotic syndrome mostly need immunosuppression to achieve remission, but many of them either relapse after immunosuppression therapy or resistant to it. On the other hand, immunosuppression therapy could increase the adverse effect. Huangqi and Huangqi type formulations have been used to treat nephrotic syndrome for years in China, however the effects and safety of these formulations have not been systematically reviewed. This is an update of a review first published in 2008.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 60 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Ireland 1 2%
Unknown 58 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 12 20%
Researcher 10 17%
Unspecified 8 13%
Student > Bachelor 8 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 12%
Other 14 23%
Unknown 1 2%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 31 52%
Unspecified 11 18%
Social Sciences 4 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 5%
Other 6 10%
Unknown 1 2%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 03 July 2013.
All research outputs
#6,509,589
of 12,527,219 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#6,911
of 8,923 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#58,084
of 148,389 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#85
of 137 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,527,219 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,923 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.2. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% 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 148,389 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 60% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 137 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.