↓ Skip to main content

Voriconazole versus amphotericin B or fluconazole in cancer patients with neutropenia

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, February 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter
f1000
1 research highlight platform

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
92 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
Voriconazole versus amphotericin B or fluconazole in cancer patients with neutropenia
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, February 2014
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd004707.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Karsten Juhl Jørgensen, Peter C Gøtzsche, Christina S Dalbøge, Helle Krogh Johansen

Abstract

Opportunistic fungal infections are a major cause of morbidity and mortality in neutropenic cancer patients and antifungal therapy is used both empirically and therapeutically in these patients.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 92 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 1%
Denmark 1 1%
Canada 1 1%
Unknown 89 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 18 20%
Student > Master 13 14%
Student > Bachelor 11 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 11%
Other 10 11%
Other 18 20%
Unknown 12 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 46 50%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 3%
Other 13 14%
Unknown 15 16%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 March 2014.
All research outputs
#7,264,103
of 12,101,174 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#6,413
of 7,978 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#94,375
of 195,712 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#148
of 173 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,101,174 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,978 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% 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 195,712 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 173 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.