↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Pathogen‐reduced platelets for the prevention of bleeding

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 (57th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters
f1000
1 research highlight platform

Citations

dimensions_citation
69 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
86 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Pathogen‐reduced platelets for the prevention of bleeding
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, March 2013
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd009072.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Butler C, Doree C, Estcourt LJ, Trivella M, Hopewell S, Brunskill SJ, Stanworth S, Murphy MF, Butler, Caroline, Doree, Carolyn, Estcourt, Lise J, Trivella, Marialena, Hopewell, Sally, Brunskill, Susan J, Stanworth, Simon, Murphy, Michael F

Abstract

Platelet transfusions are used to prevent and treat bleeding in patients who are thrombocytopenic. Despite improvements in donor screening and laboratory testing, a small risk of viral, bacterial or protozoal contamination of platelets remains. There is also an ongoing risk from newly emerging blood transfusion-transmitted infections (TTIs) for which laboratory tests may not be available at the time of initial outbreak.One solution to reduce further the risk of TTIs from platelet transfusion is photochemical pathogen reduction, a process by which pathogens are either inactivated or significantly depleted in number, thereby reducing the chance of transmission. This process might offer additional benefits, including platelet shelf-life extension, and negate the requirement for gamma-irradiation of platelets. Although current pathogen-reduction technologies have been proven significantly to reduce pathogen load in platelet concentrates, a number of published clinical studies have raised concerns about the effectiveness of pathogen-reduced platelets for post-transfusion platelet recovery and the prevention of bleeding when compared with standard platelets.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 86 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Zimbabwe 1 1%
Unknown 85 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 16%
Researcher 13 15%
Student > Bachelor 10 12%
Student > Postgraduate 9 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 10%
Other 22 26%
Unknown 9 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 47 55%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 5%
Engineering 2 2%
Other 6 7%
Unknown 11 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 10 December 2015.
All research outputs
#7,579,476
of 14,611,689 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#8,270
of 11,029 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#62,449
of 150,974 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#75
of 106 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,611,689 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,029 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 22.4. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% 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 150,974 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 57% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 106 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.