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 |
Prolonged versus intermittent β-lactam antibiotics intravenous infusion strategy in sepsis or septic shock patients: a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of randomized trials
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Intensive Care, October 2020
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s40560-020-00490-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yutaka Kondo, Kohei Ota, Haruki Imura, Naoki Hara, Nobuaki Shime |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 8 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 7 | 88% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 13% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 69 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 69 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 14% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 7 | 10% |
| Researcher | 6 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 7% |
| Other | 10 | 14% |
| Unknown | 25 | 36% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 25 | 36% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 7 | 10% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 3% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 1% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 6 | 9% |
| Unknown | 27 | 39% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 17 October 2020.
All research outputs
#5,796,534
of 23,340,595 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Intensive Care
#232
of 523 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#126,125
of 415,090 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Intensive Care
#8
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,340,595 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 523 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% 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 415,090 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 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.