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 |
Long-Term Survival and Dialysis Dependency Following Acute Kidney Injury in Intensive Care: Extended Follow-up of a Randomized Controlled Trial
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLOS Medicine, February 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001601 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Martin Gallagher, Alan Cass, Rinaldo Bellomo, Simon Finfer, David Gattas, Joanne Lee, Serigne Lo, Shay McGuinness, John Myburgh, Rachael Parke, Dorrilyn Rajbhandari |
| Abstract |
The incidence of acute kidney injury (AKI) is increasing globally and it is much more common than end-stage kidney disease. AKI is associated with high mortality and cost of hospitalisation. Studies of treatments to reduce this high mortality have used differing renal replacement therapy (RRT) modalities and have not shown improvement in the short term. The reported long-term outcomes of AKI are variable and the effect of differing RRT modalities upon them is not clear. We used the prolonged follow-up of a large clinical trial to prospectively examine the long-term outcomes and effect of RRT dosing in patients with AKI. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 24 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 4 | 17% |
| New Zealand | 3 | 13% |
| United Kingdom | 3 | 13% |
| Australia | 2 | 8% |
| Argentina | 1 | 4% |
| Ireland | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 10 | 42% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 17 | 71% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 4 | 17% |
| Scientists | 3 | 13% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 238 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 2 | <1% |
| India | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 234 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 35 | 15% |
| Researcher | 34 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 24 | 10% |
| Other | 23 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 19 | 8% |
| Other | 49 | 21% |
| Unknown | 54 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 113 | 47% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 19 | 8% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 6 | 3% |
| Engineering | 6 | 3% |
| Psychology | 5 | 2% |
| Other | 28 | 12% |
| Unknown | 61 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 43. 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 25 August 2014.
All research outputs
#970,630
of 25,410,626 outputs
Outputs from PLOS Medicine
#1,480
of 5,167 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,891
of 329,312 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS Medicine
#27
of 46 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,410,626 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,167 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 77.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% 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 329,312 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 46 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.