↓ Skip to main content

Prophylactic antibiotics to prevent surgical site infection after breast cancer surgery

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

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
8 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
42 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
119 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
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.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 119 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Slovakia 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 117 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 19 16%
Student > Master 18 15%
Student > Bachelor 13 11%
Researcher 13 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 11%
Other 43 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 58 49%
Unspecified 27 23%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 4%
Other 15 13%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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
#3,343,948
of 13,278,410 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#6,137
of 10,546 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#44,456
of 190,279 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#122
of 202 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,278,410 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,546 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.8. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% 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 190,279 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 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 202 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.