↓ Skip to main content

Statins for non-alcoholic fatty liver disease and non-alcoholic steatohepatitis

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 (83rd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
6 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
80 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
101 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
Statins for non-alcoholic fatty liver disease and non-alcoholic steatohepatitis
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2013
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd008623.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Layli Eslami, Shahin Merat, Reza Malekzadeh, Siavosh Nasseri-Moghaddam, Hermineh Aramin

Abstract

Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) are common causes of elevated liver enzymes in the general population. NASH and to some extent NAFLD have been associated with increased liver-related and all-cause mortality. No effective treatment is yet available. Recent reports have shown that the use of hydroxymethylglutaryl-coenzyme A (HMG-CoA) reductase inhibitors (statins) in patients with elevated plasma aminotransferases may result in normalisation of these liver enzymes. Whether this is a consistent effect or whether it can lead to improved clinical outcomes beyond normalisation of abnormal liver enzymes is not clear.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 101 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Ireland 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Unknown 94 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 19 19%
Researcher 17 17%
Student > Bachelor 15 15%
Unspecified 10 10%
Student > Postgraduate 10 10%
Other 30 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 57 56%
Unspecified 22 22%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 3%
Other 8 8%

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 06 July 2016.
All research outputs
#2,070,032
of 12,527,219 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#4,434
of 8,923 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#41,041
of 244,241 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#77
of 151 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 83rd 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 56% 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 244,241 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 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 151 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.