↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Interventions for erythropoietin-resistant anaemia in dialysis patients

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

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (68th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
141 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Interventions for erythropoietin-resistant anaemia in dialysis patients
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, August 2013
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd006861.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sunil V Badve, Elaine M Beller, Alan Cass, Daniel P Francis, Carmel Hawley, Iain C Macdougall, Vlado Perkovic, David W Johnson

Abstract

People living with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) often develop anaemia. Erythropoiesis-simulating agents (ESAs) are often given to people living with ESKD to maintain haemoglobin at a level to minimise need for transfusion. However, about 5% to 10% of patients with ESKD exhibit resistance to ESAs, and observational studies have shown that patients requiring high doses of ESA are at increased risk of mortality.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 141 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 141 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 23 16%
Researcher 18 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 11%
Student > Bachelor 13 9%
Student > Postgraduate 9 6%
Other 28 20%
Unknown 35 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 56 40%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 8%
Psychology 7 5%
Social Sciences 5 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 4%
Other 18 13%
Unknown 39 28%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 25 August 2021.
All research outputs
#6,928,728
of 22,719,618 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#8,557
of 12,314 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#60,438
of 199,732 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#160
of 221 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,719,618 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,314 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 30.3. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% 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 199,732 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 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 221 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.