↓ Skip to main content

Haloperidol versus low-potency first-generation antipsychotic drugs for schizophrenia

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 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)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
twitter
7 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
66 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
Haloperidol versus low-potency first-generation antipsychotic drugs for schizophrenia
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2014
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd009268.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Magdolna Tardy, Maximilian Huhn, Werner Kissling, Rolf R Engel, Stefan Leucht

Abstract

Antipsychotic drugs are the core treatment for schizophrenia. Treatment guidelines state that there is no difference in efficacy between antipsychotic compounds, however, low-potency antipsychotic drugs are often clinically perceived as less efficacious than high-potency compounds, and they also seem to differ in their side-effects.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 66 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 3%
South Africa 1 2%
Unknown 63 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 15 23%
Student > Bachelor 10 15%
Researcher 8 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 12%
Student > Postgraduate 5 8%
Other 15 23%
Unknown 5 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 38%
Psychology 7 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 8%
Other 10 15%
Unknown 8 12%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. 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 19 October 2016.
All research outputs
#780,592
of 12,667,698 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#2,631
of 10,396 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,324
of 192,319 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#53
of 226 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,667,698 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 10,396 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% 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 192,319 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 226 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.