↓ Skip to main content

An Autopsy Study Describing Causes of Death and Comparing Clinico-Pathological Findings among Hospitalized Patients in Kampala, Uganda

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, March 2012
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 (83rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
2 policy sources
twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
51 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
111 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
An Autopsy Study Describing Causes of Death and Comparing Clinico-Pathological Findings among Hospitalized Patients in Kampala, Uganda
Published in
PLOS ONE, March 2012
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0033685
Pubmed ID
Authors

Janneke A. Cox, Robert L. Lukande, Ann M. Nelson, Harriet Mayanja-Kizza, Robert Colebunders, Eric Van Marck, Yukari C. Manabe

Abstract

Information on causes of death in HIV-infected patients in Sub-Saharan Africa is mainly derived from observational cohort and verbal autopsy studies. Autopsy is the gold standard to ascertain cause of death. We conducted an autopsy study to describe and compare the clinical and autopsy causes of death and contributory findings in hospitalized HIV-infected and HIV-uninfected patients in Uganda.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 111 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Portugal 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Norway 1 <1%
Kenya 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Libya 1 <1%
Unknown 104 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 25 23%
Student > Master 19 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 10%
Student > Postgraduate 8 7%
Other 7 6%
Other 27 24%
Unknown 14 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 62 56%
Social Sciences 10 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 3%
Computer Science 2 2%
Other 13 12%
Unknown 18 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 29 August 2019.
All research outputs
#3,980,939
of 23,743,910 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#49,052
of 202,634 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#25,169
of 158,824 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#763
of 3,581 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,743,910 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 202,634 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% 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 158,824 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3,581 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.