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 |
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. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 | 2 | 22% |
| Mexico | 2 | 22% |
| Ecuador | 1 | 11% |
| Australia | 1 | 11% |
| Unknown | 3 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 7 | 78% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 11% |
| Scientists | 1 | 11% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 233 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Indonesia | 1 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Ireland | 1 | <1% |
| Italy | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 229 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 35 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 27 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 23 | 10% |
| Researcher | 22 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 18 | 8% |
| Other | 45 | 19% |
| Unknown | 63 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 90 | 39% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 26 | 11% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 10 | 4% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 6 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 2% |
| Other | 24 | 10% |
| Unknown | 73 | 31% |
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 18 June 2015.
All research outputs
#6,509,330
of 25,457,858 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#7,830
of 11,499 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#69,595
of 320,546 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#152
of 216 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,858 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th 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 34th percentile – i.e., 34% 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 320,546 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 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 216 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.