↓ Skip to main content

Home versus in-centre haemodialysis for end-stage kidney disease

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, November 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 (80th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
192 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Home versus in-centre haemodialysis for end-stage kidney disease
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, November 2014
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd009535.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Suetonia C Palmer, Andrew R Palmer, Jonathan C Craig, David W Johnson, Paul Stroumza, Luc Frantzen, Miguel Leal, Susanne Hoischen, Jorgen Hegbrant, Giovanni FM Strippoli

Abstract

Home haemodialysis is associated with improved survival and quality of life in uncontrolled studies. However, relative benefits and harms of home versus in-centre haemodialysis in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are uncertain.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 192 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
South Africa 1 <1%
Unknown 191 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 38 20%
Student > Bachelor 27 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 10%
Researcher 15 8%
Student > Postgraduate 14 7%
Other 28 15%
Unknown 50 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 60 31%
Nursing and Health Professions 40 21%
Psychology 9 5%
Social Sciences 5 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 2%
Other 23 12%
Unknown 51 27%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 02 October 2018.
All research outputs
#3,394,785
of 17,366,233 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#6,058
of 11,660 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#59,865
of 314,156 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#148
of 245 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,366,233 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,660 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 25.0. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% 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 314,156 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 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 245 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.