The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 32 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
| Title |
Rifamycins (rifampicin, rifabutin and rifapentine) compared to isoniazid for preventing tuberculosis in HIV‐negative people at risk of active TB
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd007545.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Surendra K Sharma, Anju Sharma, Tamilarasu Kadhiravan, Prathap Tharyan |
| Abstract |
Preventing active tuberculosis (TB) from developing in people with latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) is important for global TB control. Isoniazid (INH) for six to nine months has 60% to 90% protective efficacy, but the treatment period is long, liver toxicity is a problem, and completion rates outside trials are only around 50%. Rifampicin or rifamycin-combination treatments are shorter and may result in higher completion rates. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 4 | 13% |
| India | 3 | 9% |
| South Africa | 2 | 6% |
| Spain | 2 | 6% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 3% |
| Kenya | 1 | 3% |
| Colombia | 1 | 3% |
| Thailand | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 17 | 53% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 26 | 81% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 9% |
| Scientists | 2 | 6% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 3% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 308 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 3 | <1% |
| United States | 2 | <1% |
| Germany | 2 | <1% |
| South Africa | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 300 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 50 | 16% |
| Researcher | 45 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 31 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 25 | 8% |
| Other | 23 | 7% |
| Other | 52 | 17% |
| Unknown | 82 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 94 | 31% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 37 | 12% |
| Psychology | 12 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 10 | 3% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 9 | 3% |
| Other | 45 | 15% |
| Unknown | 101 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 37. 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 April 2023.
All research outputs
#1,154,445
of 26,281,970 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#2,215
of 13,203 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,131
of 208,332 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#48
of 315 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,281,970 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 13,203 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% 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 208,332 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 315 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.