↓ Skip to main content

Isotonic versus hypotonic solutions for maintenance intravenous fluid administration in children

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 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 (90th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (59th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
12 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
54 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
157 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
Isotonic versus hypotonic solutions for maintenance intravenous fluid administration in children
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2014
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd009457.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sarah McNab, Robert S Ware, Kristen A Neville, Karen Choong, Mark G Coulthard, Trevor Duke, Andrew Davidson, Tavey Dorofaeff

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 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 157 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 1%
Canada 2 1%
Unknown 153 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 25 16%
Student > Master 23 15%
Other 22 14%
Student > Postgraduate 21 13%
Student > Bachelor 21 13%
Other 45 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 116 74%
Unspecified 20 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 1%
Other 10 6%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 09 December 2015.
All research outputs
#1,006,457
of 12,527,219 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#3,067
of 8,923 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#26,362
of 286,927 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#99
of 244 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,527,219 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,923 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 gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 286,927 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 244 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 59% of its contemporaries.