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 |
Comparative efficacy of vasoactive medications in patients with septic shock: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
|
---|---|
Published in |
Critical Care, May 2019
|
DOI | 10.1186/s13054-019-2427-4 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Lu Cheng, Jing Yan, Shutang Han, Qiuhua Chen, Mingqi Chen, Hua Jiang, Jun Lu |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 39 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Mexico | 6 | 15% |
United States | 4 | 10% |
Colombia | 2 | 5% |
United Kingdom | 2 | 5% |
Algeria | 1 | 3% |
Spain | 1 | 3% |
Belgium | 1 | 3% |
Malaysia | 1 | 3% |
Chile | 1 | 3% |
Other | 0 | 0% |
Unknown | 20 | 51% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 33 | 85% |
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 5 | 13% |
Scientists | 1 | 3% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 88 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Unknown | 88 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Researcher | 11 | 13% |
Other | 10 | 11% |
Student > Bachelor | 10 | 11% |
Student > Master | 8 | 9% |
Student > Postgraduate | 7 | 8% |
Other | 21 | 24% |
Unknown | 21 | 24% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 42 | 48% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 8% |
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 2% |
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 2% |
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 2% |
Other | 5 | 6% |
Unknown | 28 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 24. 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 03 February 2021.
All research outputs
#1,601,144
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#1,410
of 6,555 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#35,165
of 365,253 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#40
of 123 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 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 6,555 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% 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 365,253 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 123 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 67% of its contemporaries.