↓ Skip to main content

Preoperative skin antiseptics for preventing surgical wound infections after clean surgery

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, March 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 (91st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (73rd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
5 tweeters
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page
f1000
1 research highlight platform

Citations

dimensions_citation
113 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
2 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
Preoperative skin antiseptics for preventing surgical wound infections after clean surgery
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, March 2013
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd003949.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Dumville JC, McFarlane E, Edwards P, Lipp A, Holmes A, Dumville, Jo C, McFarlane, Emma, Edwards, Peggy, Lipp, Allyson, Holmes, Alexandra

Abstract

Surgical site infection rates in the month following clean surgery vary from 0.6% (knee prosthesis) to 5% (limb amputation). Due to the large number of clean surgical procedures conducted annually the costs of these surgical site infections (SSIs) can be considerable in financial and social terms. Preoperative skin antisepsis using antiseptics is performed to reduce the risk of SSIs by removing soil and transient organisms from the skin where a surgical incision will be made. Antiseptics are thought to be toxic to bacteria and therefore aid their mechanical removal. The effectiveness of preoperative skin preparation is thought to be dependent on both the antiseptic used and the method of application, however, it is unclear whether preoperative skin antisepsis actually reduces postoperative wound infection, and, if so, which antiseptic is most effective.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 2 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 50%
Japan 1 50%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 7 350%
Researcher 7 350%
Student > Master 4 200%
Other 3 150%
Librarian 2 100%
Other 5 250%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 24 1200%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 50%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 50%
Chemistry 1 50%
Unspecified 1 50%
Other 0 0%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 29 March 2015.
All research outputs
#885,894
of 12,101,174 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#2,164
of 7,978 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12,128
of 144,157 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#30
of 114 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,101,174 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,978 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% 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 144,157 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 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 114 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 73% of its contemporaries.