↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Rifamycins (rifampicin, rifabutin and rifapentine) compared to isoniazid for preventing tuberculosis in HIV‐negative people at risk of active TB

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

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source
twitter
33 X users
facebook
7 Facebook pages
wikipedia
9 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
106 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
291 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 33 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 291 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 283 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 47 16%
Researcher 43 15%
Student > Bachelor 31 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 8%
Other 23 8%
Other 49 17%
Unknown 74 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 91 31%
Nursing and Health Professions 37 13%
Psychology 12 4%
Social Sciences 10 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 8 3%
Other 43 15%
Unknown 90 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 38. 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
#1,068,665
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#2,161
of 11,484 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#8,725
of 206,623 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#50
of 299 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 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 11,484 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 39.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 206,623 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 299 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.