↓ Skip to main content

Sepsis and ‘superbugs’: should we favour the transperineal over the transrectal approach for prostate biopsy?

Overview of attention for article published in British Journal of Urology, February 2014
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 (92nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
13 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
125 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
109 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
Sepsis and ‘superbugs’: should we favour the transperineal over the transrectal approach for prostate biopsy?
Published in
British Journal of Urology, February 2014
DOI 10.1111/bju.12536
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jeremy P. Grummet, Mahesha Weerakoon, Sean Huang, Nathan Lawrentschuk, Mark Frydenberg, Daniel A. Moon, Mary O'Reilly, Declan Murphy

Abstract

To determine the rate of hospital re-admission for sepsis after transperineal (TP) biopsy using both local data and worldwide literature, as there is growing interest in TP biopsy as an alternative to transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS)-guided biopsy for patients undergoing repeat prostate biopsy.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 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 109 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 <1%
Colombia 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 105 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 17 16%
Student > Master 13 12%
Other 13 12%
Student > Bachelor 12 11%
Student > Postgraduate 8 7%
Other 21 19%
Unknown 25 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 60 55%
Immunology and Microbiology 4 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 3%
Engineering 2 2%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 2%
Other 8 7%
Unknown 30 28%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. 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 09 May 2018.
All research outputs
#850,927
of 13,502,342 outputs
Outputs from British Journal of Urology
#227
of 4,313 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,253
of 187,434 outputs
Outputs of similar age from British Journal of Urology
#3
of 80 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,502,342 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,313 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 187,434 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 80 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.