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 |
Heparin versus placebo for non‐ST elevation acute coronary syndromes
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, June 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd003462.pub3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Carlos A Andrade-Castellanos, Luis Enrique Colunga-Lozano, Netzahualpilli Delgado-Figueroa, Kirk Magee |
| Abstract |
Non-ST elevation acute coronary syndromes (NSTEACS) represent a spectrum of disease including unstable angina and non-ST segment myocardial infarction (NSTEMI). Despite treatment with aspirin, beta-blockers and nitroglycerin, unstable angina/NSTEMI is still associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Although evidence suggests that low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) is more efficacious compared to unfractionated heparin (UFH), there is limited data to support the role of heparins as a drug class in the treatment of NSTEACS. This is an update of a review last published in 2008. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Mexico | 1 | 25% |
| Italy | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 50% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 25% |
| Scientists | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 132 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Colombia | 1 | <1% |
| South Africa | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 129 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 17 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 15 | 11% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 13 | 10% |
| Researcher | 10 | 8% |
| Professor | 8 | 6% |
| Other | 32 | 24% |
| Unknown | 37 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 60 | 45% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 14 | 11% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 2% |
| Psychology | 3 | 2% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 8 | 6% |
| Unknown | 42 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 23. 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 29 August 2023.
All research outputs
#1,639,200
of 25,457,297 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#3,492
of 11,499 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,965
of 242,649 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#70
of 227 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,297 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 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 has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% 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 242,649 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 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 227 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.