↓ Skip to main content

Belatacept for kidney transplant recipients

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 (93rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (68th percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
77 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
107 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
Belatacept for kidney transplant recipients
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, November 2014
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd010699.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Philip Masson, Lorna Henderson, Jeremy R Chapman, Jonathan C Craig, Angela C Webster

Abstract

Most people who receive a kidney transplant die from either cardiovascular disease or cancer before their transplant fails. The most common reason for someone with a kidney transplant to lose the function of their transplanted kidney necessitating return to dialysis is chronic kidney transplant scarring. Immunosuppressant drugs have side effects that increase risks of cardiovascular disease, cancer and chronic kidney transplant scarring. Belatacept may provide sufficient immunosuppression while avoiding unwanted side effects of other immunosuppressant drugs. However, high rates of post-transplant lymphoproliferative disease (PTLD) have been reported when belatacept is used in particular kidney transplant recipients at high dosage.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 107 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 2%
Colombia 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 103 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 27 25%
Researcher 18 17%
Other 9 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 7%
Student > Bachelor 8 7%
Other 23 21%
Unknown 14 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 57 53%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 6%
Psychology 6 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 3%
Other 10 9%
Unknown 21 20%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. 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 08 April 2016.
All research outputs
#827,004
of 13,649,061 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#2,580
of 10,696 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#19,600
of 299,233 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#77
of 251 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,649,061 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 10,696 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% 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 299,233 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 251 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 68% of its contemporaries.