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 |
Prophylactic antibiotics to prevent surgical site infection after breast cancer surgery
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, March 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd005360.pub4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Daniel J Jones, Frances Bunn, Sophie V Bell‐Syer |
| Abstract |
Surgery has been used as part of breast cancer treatment for centuries; however any surgical procedure has the potential risk of infection. Infection rates for surgical treatment of breast cancer are documented at between 3% and 15%, higher than average for a clean surgical procedure. Pre- and perioperative antibiotics have been found to be useful in lowering infection rates in other surgical groups, yet there is no consensus on the use of prophylactic antibiotics for breast cancer surgery. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 Kingdom | 2 | 33% |
| New Zealand | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 3 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 83% |
| Scientists | 1 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 117 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Slovakia | 1 | <1% |
| South Africa | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 115 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 21 | 18% |
| Researcher | 11 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 10 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 7% |
| Other | 23 | 20% |
| Unknown | 33 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 44 | 38% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 4% |
| Computer Science | 4 | 3% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 3% |
| Other | 16 | 14% |
| Unknown | 38 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 July 2018.
All research outputs
#8,220,574
of 25,457,297 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#8,904
of 11,499 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#75,219
of 235,619 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#184
of 222 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,297 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th 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 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% 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 235,619 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 222 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.