↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Comparison of different regimens of proton pump inhibitors for acute peptic ulcer bleeding

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

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (89th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
8 tweeters
f1000
1 research highlight platform

Citations

dimensions_citation
54 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
189 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
Title
Comparison of different regimens of proton pump inhibitors for acute peptic ulcer bleeding
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, June 2013
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd007999.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ignacio Neumann, Luz M Letelier, Gabriel Rada, Juan Carlos Claro, Janet Martin, Colin W Howden, Yuhong Yuan, Grigorios I Leontiadis

Abstract

Treatment with proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) improves clinical outcomes in patients with peptic ulcer bleeding. However, the optimal dose and route of administration of PPIs remains controversial.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 189 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 2 1%
Colombia 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 185 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 27 14%
Researcher 22 12%
Other 21 11%
Student > Bachelor 20 11%
Student > Postgraduate 18 10%
Other 46 24%
Unknown 35 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 92 49%
Nursing and Health Professions 15 8%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 11 6%
Psychology 4 2%
Computer Science 4 2%
Other 23 12%
Unknown 40 21%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 30 March 2022.
All research outputs
#2,248,648
of 22,111,096 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#4,828
of 12,183 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#18,700
of 175,162 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#36
of 127 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,111,096 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,183 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 29.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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 175,162 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 127 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.