↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Erythropoiesis-stimulating agents for anaemia in chronic heart failure patients

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2010
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
56 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
127 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Erythropoiesis-stimulating agents for anaemia in chronic heart failure patients
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2010
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd007613.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Katherine Ngo, Dipak Kotecha, Julia AE Walters, Luis Manzano, Alberto Palazzuoli, Dirk J van Veldhuisen, Marcus Flather

Abstract

Chronic heart failure (CHF) is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Anaemia is a common (12-55%) co-morbid condition and is associated with worsening symptoms and increased mortality. Anaemia is treatable and can be targeted in the treatment of patients with CHF. Erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESA), supplemented by iron therapy, are used to treat anaemia in chronic kidney disease and cancer, however safety concerns have been raised in these patients. The clinical benefit and safety of these agents in CHF remains unclear.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Australia 2 2%
Colombia 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 123 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 20 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 13%
Researcher 15 12%
Student > Bachelor 14 11%
Other 12 9%
Other 27 21%
Unknown 22 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 58 46%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 10%
Psychology 9 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 3%
Social Sciences 4 3%
Other 13 10%
Unknown 26 20%

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 02 February 2013.
All research outputs
#10,023,986
of 12,527,093 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#8,287
of 8,923 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#175,172
of 250,367 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#386
of 433 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,527,093 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
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 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% 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 250,367 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 433 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.