↓ Skip to main content

Tidal versus other forms of peritoneal dialysis for acute kidney injury

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, June 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
40 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
Tidal versus other forms of peritoneal dialysis for acute kidney injury
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, June 2012
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd007016.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lei Jiang, Rong Zeng, KeHu Yang, Deng Hai Mi, Jin Hui Tian, Bin Ma, Yali Liu

Abstract

Acute kidney injury (AKI) is associated with substantial morbidity and mortality. Recent studies have shown that dialysis dose was a major factor associated with patient survival. Unresolved questions persist about which mode of peritoneal dialysis (PD) should be used for most patients with AKI.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 40 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 40 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 20%
Student > Bachelor 7 18%
Researcher 5 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 10%
Professor 3 8%
Other 9 23%
Unknown 4 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 63%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Computer Science 1 3%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 7 18%

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 18 December 2014.
All research outputs
#10,023,990
of 12,527,093 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#8,408
of 8,923 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#192,787
of 286,928 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#214
of 227 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,527,093 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% 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 286,928 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 227 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.