↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Chemical pleurodesis versus surgical intervention for persistent and recurrent pneumothoraces in cystic fibrosis

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

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
39 Mendeley
Title
Chemical pleurodesis versus surgical intervention for persistent and recurrent pneumothoraces in cystic fibrosis
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2012
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd007481.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Reshma Amin, Peadar G Noone, Felix Ratjen

Abstract

Pneumothorax is a potentially life-threatening complication for people with cystic fibrosis. Spontaneous pneumothorax is the presence of air in the pleural space and can be subdivided into first episode and recurrent. The recurrence of pneumothorax is when it occurs on the same side seven days or more after initial resolution. A pneumothorax is persistent if the air leak lasts for more than five days (Schidlow 1993). Managing spontaneous pneumothoraces is controversial and there is no standard treatment. Medical and surgical intervention are the two main categories for the treatment of recurrent pneumothoraces in people with cystic fibrosis. While surgical interventions are felt to be more effective in people without cystic fibrosis, the complications directly related to the procedure, as well as the post-operative complications make surgical interventions riskier for people with cystic fibrosis. Additionally, these interventions have the potential to make people with cystic fibrosis ineligible for lung transplantation in the future. Therefore, the benefits and side effects or disadvantages for the medical and surgical treatment of recurrent pneumothoraces in people with cystic fibrosis need to be systematically reviewed.

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 39 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 39 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 6 15%
Researcher 5 13%
Student > Master 4 10%
Student > Bachelor 4 10%
Other 4 10%
Other 5 13%
Unknown 11 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 44%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 10%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 5%
Psychology 1 3%
Social Sciences 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 13 33%

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 15 January 2018.
All research outputs
#3,517,300
of 12,527,093 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#5,957
of 8,923 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#70,597
of 255,942 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#301
of 447 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 71st 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 36th percentile – i.e., 36% 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 255,942 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 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 447 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.