↓ Skip to main content

Lipid-lowering agents for nephrotic syndrome

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 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 (82nd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
10 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
98 Mendeley
citeulike
2 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
Lipid-lowering agents for nephrotic syndrome
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2013
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd005425.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Xiangyu Kong, Hao Yuan, Junming Fan, Zi Li, Taixiang Wu, Lanhui Jiang

Abstract

Nephrotic syndrome is the collective name given to a group of symptoms that include proteinuria, lipiduria, hypoalbuminaemia, oedema, hypercholesterolaemia, elevated triglycerides, and hyperlipidaemia. Hyperlipidaemia is thought to aggravate glomerulosclerosis (hardening of blood vessels in the kidneys) and enhance progression of glomerular disease. Studies have established that reduction in total cholesterol and low density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol is associated with reduction in risk of cardiovascular diseases. In 2011, the European Society of Cardiology and European Atherosclerosis Society guidelines for the management of dyslipidaemia recommended use of statins as first-line agents in the management of nephrotic dyslipidaemia. However, the effectiveness and safety of statins for people with nephrotic syndrome remains uncertain. Furthermore, the efficacy of second-line lipid-lowering drugs, such as ezetimibe and nicotinic acid, has not been proven in patients with nephrotic syndrome who are unable to tolerate statin therapy.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 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 98 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Indonesia 1 1%
Italy 1 1%
Ireland 1 1%
Netherlands 1 1%
Unknown 94 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 17 17%
Researcher 15 15%
Unspecified 13 13%
Student > Master 12 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 12%
Other 29 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 49 50%
Unspecified 20 20%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 6 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 3%
Other 11 11%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 18 June 2015.
All research outputs
#2,171,338
of 12,527,219 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#4,626
of 8,923 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#42,123
of 241,252 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#64
of 128 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,527,219 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% 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 54% 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 241,252 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 128 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 50% of its contemporaries.