↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Intravenous immunoglobulin for treating sepsis, severe sepsis and septic shock

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

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (56th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
twitter
5 X users
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
245 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
450 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Intravenous immunoglobulin for treating sepsis, severe sepsis and septic shock
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, September 2013
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd001090.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marissa M Alejandria, Mary Ann D Lansang, Leonila F Dans, Jacinto Blas Mantaring

Abstract

Mortality from sepsis and septic shock remains high. Results of trials on intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIG) as adjunctive therapy for sepsis have been conflicting. This is an update of a Cochrane review that was originally published in 1999 and updated in 2002 and 2010.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 450 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 4 <1%
United States 2 <1%
Malaysia 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Colombia 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
India 1 <1%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 437 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 54 12%
Researcher 51 11%
Student > Master 49 11%
Student > Bachelor 48 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 33 7%
Other 105 23%
Unknown 110 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 209 46%
Nursing and Health Professions 28 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 14 3%
Social Sciences 12 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 10 2%
Other 53 12%
Unknown 124 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. 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 01 August 2023.
All research outputs
#2,015,356
of 25,393,071 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#4,252
of 11,487 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#16,636
of 199,123 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#95
of 217 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,393,071 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,487 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 gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% 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 199,123 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 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 217 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% of its contemporaries.