| Title |
Systemic treatments for the prevention of venous thrombo-embolic events in paediatric cancer patients with tunnelled central venous catheters
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, September 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd009160.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Reineke A Schoot, Leontien CM Kremer, Marianne D van de Wetering, Cornelia H van Ommen |
| Abstract |
Venous thrombo-embolic events (VTEs) occur in 2.2% to 14% of paediatric cancer patients and cause significant morbidity and mortality. The malignant disease itself, the cancer treatment and the presence of central venous catheters (CVCs) increase the risk of VTE. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 257 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | <1% |
| Colombia | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 254 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 38 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 32 | 12% |
| Researcher | 23 | 9% |
| Other | 20 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 20 | 8% |
| Other | 54 | 21% |
| Unknown | 70 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 109 | 42% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 22 | 9% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 6 | 2% |
| Psychology | 5 | 2% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 2% |
| Other | 25 | 10% |
| Unknown | 85 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 16 September 2013.
All research outputs
#20,202,510
of 22,721,584 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#11,991
of 12,314 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#173,708
of 198,457 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#225
of 229 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,721,584 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
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 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 198,457 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 229 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.