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 |
Does intravenous contrast-enhanced computed tomography cause acute kidney injury? Protocol of a systematic review of the evidence
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Systematic Reviews, August 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/2046-4053-3-94 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jeanne Françoise Kayibanda, Swapnil Hiremath, Greg A Knoll, Dean Fergusson, Benjamin JW Chow, Wael Shabana, Ayub Akbari |
| Abstract |
Contrast-induced acute kidney injury is a common cause of iatrogenic acute kidney injury (AKI). Most of the published estimates of AKI after contrast use originate from the cardiac catheterization literature despite contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) scans being the more common setting for contrast use. This systematic review aims to summarize the current evidence about (1)the risk of AKI following intravenous (IV) contrast-enhanced CT scans and(2) the risk of clinical outcomes (i.e. death, hospitalization and need for renal replacement therapy) due to IV contrast-enhanced CT scans. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 48 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 47 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Doctoral Student | 9 | 19% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 8% |
| Researcher | 3 | 6% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 9 | 19% |
| Unknown | 16 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 22 | 46% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 1 | 2% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 2% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 2% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 21 | 44% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 05 December 2015.
All research outputs
#18,349,015
of 23,577,761 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Reviews
#1,756
of 2,048 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#160,777
of 237,202 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Reviews
#30
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,761 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,048 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.9. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% 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 237,202 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.