↓ Skip to main content

Banding ligation versus beta-blockers for primary prevention in oesophageal varices in adults

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

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
103 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
97 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
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
Banding ligation versus beta-blockers for primary prevention in oesophageal varices in adults
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, August 2012
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd004544.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lise Lotte Gluud, Aleksander Krag

Abstract

Non-selective beta-blockers are used as a first-line treatment for primary prevention in patients with medium- to high-risk oesophageal varices. The effect of non-selective beta-blockers on mortality is debated and many patients experience adverse events. Trials on banding ligation versus non-selective beta-blockers for patients with oesophageal varices and no history of bleeding have reached equivocal results.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 97 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 1 1%
India 1 1%
Guatemala 1 1%
Spain 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Unknown 92 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 14%
Student > Postgraduate 13 13%
Other 12 12%
Student > Bachelor 11 11%
Researcher 10 10%
Other 31 32%
Unknown 6 6%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 66 68%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 4%
Social Sciences 2 2%
Computer Science 1 1%
Other 7 7%
Unknown 13 13%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 06 July 2016.
All research outputs
#3,403,291
of 12,527,093 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#5,753
of 8,923 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#32,280
of 125,857 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#41
of 82 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,527,093 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,923 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.2. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% 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 125,857 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 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 82 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 50% of its contemporaries.