↓ Skip to main content

Multiple drug combinations of bortezomib, lenalidomide, and thalidomide for first‐line treatment in adults with transplant‐ineligible multiple myeloma: a network meta‐analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, November 2019
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (79th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source
twitter
15 X users
patent
1 patent
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
10 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
30 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
192 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
Multiple drug combinations of bortezomib, lenalidomide, and thalidomide for first‐line treatment in adults with transplant‐ineligible multiple myeloma: a network meta‐analysis
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, November 2019
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd013487
Pubmed ID
Authors

Vanessa Piechotta, Tina Jakob, Peter Langer, Ina Monsef, Christof Scheid, Lise J Estcourt, Sunday Ocheni, Sebastian Theurich, Kathrin Kuhr, Benjamin Scheckel, Anne Adams, Nicole Skoetz

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 192 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 192 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 24 13%
Researcher 21 11%
Other 19 10%
Student > Master 14 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 7%
Other 23 12%
Unknown 78 41%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 41 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 11 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 8 4%
Psychology 7 4%
Other 28 15%
Unknown 84 44%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 33. 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 January 2024.
All research outputs
#1,299,791
of 26,794,105 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#2,510
of 13,278 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#29,790
of 484,667 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#38
of 188 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,794,105 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,278 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 36.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 484,667 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 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 188 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.