↓ 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 (69th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
123 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 123 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 123 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 22 18%
Researcher 17 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 13%
Student > Bachelor 13 11%
Student > Postgraduate 8 7%
Other 23 19%
Unknown 24 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 53 43%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 6 5%
Psychology 6 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 3%
Other 14 11%
Unknown 29 24%

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
#5,741,736
of 18,942,198 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#8,000
of 11,894 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#51,145
of 173,726 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#72
of 122 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 18,942,198 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 11,894 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 26.8. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% 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 173,726 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 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 122 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.