The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
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.
Timeline
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
Title |
Interventions for erythropoietin‐resistant anaemia in dialysis patients
|
---|---|
Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, August 2013
|
DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd006861.pub3 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Sunil V Badve, Elaine M Beller, Alan Cass, Daniel P Francis, Carmel Hawley, Iain C Macdougall, Vlado Perkovic, David W Johnson |
Abstract |
People living with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) often develop anaemia. Erythropoiesis-simulating agents (ESAs) are often given to people living with ESKD to maintain haemoglobin at a level to minimise need for transfusion. However, about 5% to 10% of patients with ESKD exhibit resistance to ESAs, and observational studies have shown that patients requiring high doses of ESA are at increased risk of mortality. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Australia | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 167 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Unknown | 167 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Master | 24 | 14% |
Researcher | 19 | 11% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 15 | 9% |
Student > Bachelor | 14 | 8% |
Student > Doctoral Student | 10 | 6% |
Other | 33 | 20% |
Unknown | 52 | 31% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 58 | 35% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 14 | 8% |
Psychology | 7 | 4% |
Social Sciences | 5 | 3% |
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 5 | 3% |
Other | 20 | 12% |
Unknown | 58 | 35% |
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 25 August 2021.
All research outputs
#8,323,707
of 26,311,549 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#9,378
of 13,206 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#66,507
of 213,635 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#171
of 228 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,311,549 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,206 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 33.6. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% 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 213,635 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 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 228 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.