The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 |
Desferrioxamine mesylate for managing transfusional iron overload in people with transfusion‐dependent thalassaemia
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, August 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd004450.pub3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Sheila A Fisher, Susan J Brunskill, Carolyn Doree, Sarah Gooding, Onima Chowdhury, David J Roberts |
| Abstract |
Thalassaemia major is a genetic disease characterised by a reduced ability to produce haemoglobin. Management of the resulting anaemia is through red blood cell transfusions.Repeated transfusions result in an excessive accumulation of iron in the body (iron overload), removal of which is achieved through iron chelation therapy. Desferrioxamine mesylate (desferrioxamine) is one of the most widely used iron chelators. Substantial data have shown the beneficial effects of desferrioxamine, although adherence to desferrioxamine therapy is a challenge. Alternative oral iron chelators, deferiprone and deferasirox, are now commonly used. Important questions exist about whether desferrioxamine, as monotherapy or in combination with an oral iron chelator, is the best treatment for iron chelation therapy. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
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 | 2 | <1% |
| Germany | 2 | <1% |
| Indonesia | 1 | <1% |
| South Africa | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 302 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 56 | 18% |
| Researcher | 40 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 37 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 28 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 19 | 6% |
| Other | 60 | 19% |
| Unknown | 68 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 103 | 33% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 30 | 10% |
| Psychology | 18 | 6% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 12 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 10 | 3% |
| Other | 48 | 16% |
| Unknown | 87 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 07 February 2014.
All research outputs
#17,117,227
of 25,936,091 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#11,465
of 13,164 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#129,621
of 211,539 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#194
of 230 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,936,091 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,164 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.2. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% 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 211,539 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 230 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.