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 |
Interventions for protecting renal function in the perioperative period
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, September 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd003590.pub4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Mathew Zacharias, Mohan Mugawar, G Peter Herbison, Robert J Walker, Karen Hovhannisyan, Pal Sivalingam, Niamh P Conlon |
| Abstract |
Various methods have been used to try to protect kidney function in patients undergoing surgery. These most often include pharmacological interventions such as dopamine and its analogues, diuretics, calcium channel blockers, angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, N-acetyl cysteine (NAC), atrial natriuretic peptide (ANP), sodium bicarbonate, antioxidants and erythropoietin (EPO). |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 17% |
| Nigeria | 1 | 17% |
| Peru | 1 | 17% |
| United States | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 2 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 83% |
| Scientists | 1 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 249 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 248 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 32 | 13% |
| Researcher | 28 | 11% |
| Other | 24 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 24 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 24 | 10% |
| Other | 55 | 22% |
| Unknown | 62 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 122 | 49% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 15 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 8 | 3% |
| Social Sciences | 7 | 3% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 2% |
| Other | 21 | 8% |
| Unknown | 71 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 28 October 2013.
All research outputs
#6,599,710
of 25,457,297 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#7,870
of 11,499 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#52,897
of 211,004 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#155
of 234 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,297 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,499 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 40.0. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% 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 211,004 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 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 234 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.