↓ Skip to main content

Thalidomide for managing cancer cachexia

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

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
47 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
149 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
Thalidomide for managing cancer cachexia
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2012
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd008664.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Joanne Reid, Moyra Mills, Marie M Cantwell, Chris R Cardwell, Liam J Murray, Michael Donnelly

Abstract

Cancer cachexia is a multidimensional syndrome characterised by wasting, loss of weight, loss of appetite, metabolic alterations, fatigue and reduced performance status. A significant number of patients with advanced cancer develop cachexia before death. There is no identified optimum treatment for cancer cachexia. While the exact mechanism of the action of thalidomide is unclear, it is known to have immunomodulatory and anti-inflammatory properties, which are thought to help reduce the weight loss associated with cachexia. Preliminary studies of thalidomide have demonstrated encouraging results.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 149 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Hong Kong 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Ireland 1 <1%
Unknown 143 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 25 17%
Student > Master 25 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 13%
Student > Bachelor 17 11%
Student > Postgraduate 11 7%
Other 32 21%
Unknown 19 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 66 44%
Nursing and Health Professions 16 11%
Psychology 10 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 5%
Social Sciences 5 3%
Other 17 11%
Unknown 28 19%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 May 2020.
All research outputs
#4,023,970
of 15,117,174 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#6,671
of 11,110 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#31,071
of 125,950 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#51
of 98 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,117,174 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,110 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 22.7. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% 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 125,950 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 98 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.