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 |
Anidulafungin compared with fluconazole for treatment of candidemia and other forms of invasive candidiasis caused by Candida albicans: a multivariate analysis of factors associated with improved outcome
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Infectious Diseases, September 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2334-11-261 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Annette C Reboli, Andrew F Shorr, Coleman Rotstein, Peter G Pappas, Daniel H Kett, Haran T Schlamm, Arlene L Reisman, Pinaki Biswas, Thomas J Walsh |
| Abstract |
Candida albicans is the most common cause of candidemia and other forms of invasive candidiasis. Systemic infections due to C. albicans exhibit good susceptibility to fluconazole and echinocandins. However, the echinocandin anidulafungin was recently demonstrated to be more effective than fluconazole for systemic Candida infections in a randomized, double-blind trial among 245 patients. In that trial, most infections were caused by C. albicans, and all respective isolates were susceptible to randomized study drug. We sought to better understand the factors associated with the enhanced efficacy of anidulafungin and hypothesized that intrinsic properties of the antifungal agents contributed to the treatment differences. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 121 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 120 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 19 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 15 | 12% |
| Other | 12 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 7% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 6% |
| Other | 37 | 31% |
| Unknown | 23 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 54 | 45% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 11 | 9% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 11 | 9% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 4 | 3% |
| Unspecified | 3 | 2% |
| Other | 9 | 7% |
| Unknown | 29 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 2012.
All research outputs
#15,241,801
of 22,662,201 outputs
Outputs from BMC Infectious Diseases
#4,429
of 7,635 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#91,309
of 131,682 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Infectious Diseases
#63
of 92 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,662,201 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,635 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.6. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% 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 131,682 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 92 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.