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 |
Protocol for a double-blind randomised placebo-controlled trial of lithium carbonate in patients with amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (LiCALS) [Eudract number: 2008-006891-31]
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Neurology, September 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2377-11-111 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ammar Al-Chalabi, Pamela J Shaw, Carolyn A Young, Karen E Morrison, Caroline Murphy, Marie Thornhill, Joanna Kelly, I Nicholas Steen, P Nigel Leigh |
| Abstract |
Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis is a rapidly progressive neurodegenerative disorder characterised by loss of motor neurons leading to severe weakness and death from respiratory failure within 3-5 years. Riluzole prolongs survival in ALS. A published report has suggested a dramatic effect of lithium carbonate on survival. 44 patients were studied, with 16 randomly selected to take LiCO3 and riluzole and 28 allocated to take riluzole alone. In the group treated with lithium, no patients had died (i.e., 100% survival) at the end of the study (15 months from entry), compared to 71% surviving in the riluzole-only group. Although the trial can be criticised on several grounds, there is a substantial rationale from other laboratory studies that lithium is worth investigating therapeutically in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Chile | 1 | 50% |
| United States | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
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 Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 104 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 22 | 21% |
| Researcher | 20 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 14 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 7% |
| Unspecified | 6 | 6% |
| Other | 22 | 21% |
| Unknown | 16 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 34 | 32% |
| Psychology | 18 | 17% |
| Unspecified | 6 | 6% |
| Neuroscience | 5 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 5% |
| Other | 16 | 15% |
| Unknown | 23 | 21% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 14 April 2012.
All research outputs
#14,136,253
of 22,651,245 outputs
Outputs from BMC Neurology
#1,212
of 2,408 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#85,758
of 130,596 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Neurology
#23
of 40 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,651,245 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,408 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% 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 130,596 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 40 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.