↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Oral versus intravenous rehydration for treating dehydration due to gastroenteritis in children

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2006
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 (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
3 blogs
twitter
23 tweeters
wikipedia
5 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
165 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
165 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
connotea
1 Connotea
Title
Oral versus intravenous rehydration for treating dehydration due to gastroenteritis in children
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2006
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd004390.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lisa Hartling, Steven Bellemare, Natasha Wiebe, Kelly F Russell, Terry P Klassen, William Raine Craig

Abstract

Dehydration associated with gastroenteritis is a serious complication. Oral rehydration is an effective and inexpensive treatment, but some physicians prefer intravenous methods.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 23 tweeters 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 165 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Australia 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Unknown 163 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 25 15%
Student > Bachelor 25 15%
Other 19 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 8%
Student > Postgraduate 12 7%
Other 35 21%
Unknown 36 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 71 43%
Nursing and Health Professions 19 12%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 2%
Other 20 12%
Unknown 44 27%

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 24 December 2022.
All research outputs
#1,039,026
of 22,971,207 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#2,318
of 12,335 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,554
of 65,871 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#6
of 70 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,971,207 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 12,335 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 30.7. 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 65,871 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 70 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.