↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Osmotic therapies added to antibiotics for acute bacterial meningitis

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, March 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (61st percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
5 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
26 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
112 Mendeley
Title
Osmotic therapies added to antibiotics for acute bacterial meningitis
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, March 2013
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd008806.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Emma CB Wall, Katherine MB Ajdukiewicz, Robert S Heyderman, Paul Garner

Abstract

Every day children and adults throughout the world die from acute community-acquired bacterial meningitis, particularly in low-income countries. Survivors are at risk of deafness, epilepsy and neurological disabilities. Osmotic therapies have been proposed as an adjunct to improve mortality and morbidity from bacterial meningitis. The theory is that they will attract extra-vascular fluid by osmosis and thus reduce cerebral oedema by moving excess water from the brain into the blood. The intention is to thus reduce death and improve neurological outcomes.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 112 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 2%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Colombia 1 <1%
India 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
Unknown 106 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 23 21%
Student > Master 19 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 12%
Researcher 12 11%
Student > Postgraduate 12 11%
Other 24 21%
Unknown 9 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 67 60%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 5%
Psychology 5 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 3%
Other 9 8%
Unknown 15 13%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 25 February 2015.
All research outputs
#3,639,781
of 12,527,219 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#6,129
of 8,923 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#42,331
of 144,595 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#73
of 110 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,527,219 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% 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 29th percentile – i.e., 29% 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 144,595 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 61% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 110 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.