↓ Skip to main content

Olanzapine versus other atypical antipsychotics for schizophrenia

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, March 2010
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 (90th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
16 tweeters
weibo
1 weibo user
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
132 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
353 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
Olanzapine versus other atypical antipsychotics for schizophrenia
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, March 2010
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd006654.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Katja Komossa, Christine Rummel-Kluge, Heike Hunger, Franziska Schmid, Sandra Schwarz, Lorna Duggan, Werner Kissling, Stefan Leucht

Abstract

In many countries of the industrialised world second generation ("atypical") antipsychotics have become the first line drug treatment for people with schizophrenia. The question as to whether, and if so how much, the effects of the various second generation antipsychotics differ is a matter of debate. In this review we examined how the efficacy and tolerability of olanzapine differs from that of other second generation antipsychotics.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 16 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 353 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 3 <1%
Australia 2 <1%
Germany 2 <1%
Canada 2 <1%
Netherlands 2 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Other 5 1%
Unknown 333 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 65 18%
Student > Master 64 18%
Student > Bachelor 42 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 35 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 35 10%
Other 112 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 162 46%
Unspecified 47 13%
Psychology 46 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 27 8%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 18 5%
Other 53 15%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 22 March 2017.
All research outputs
#1,018,178
of 12,527,093 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#2,968
of 8,923 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,177
of 159,645 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#28
of 100 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,527,093 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
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 has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% 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 159,645 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 100 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 72% of its contemporaries.