↓ 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 (92nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (65th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
policy
1 policy source
twitter
4 tweeters
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
219 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
415 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 III

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.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 tweeters 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 415 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 402 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 49 12%
Other 48 12%
Researcher 47 11%
Student > Bachelor 46 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 31 7%
Other 103 25%
Unknown 91 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 197 47%
Nursing and Health Professions 28 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 15 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 14 3%
Social Sciences 12 3%
Other 44 11%
Unknown 105 25%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 21. 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 21 February 2022.
All research outputs
#1,539,016
of 22,723,682 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#3,539
of 12,314 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#13,392
of 179,663 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#74
of 216 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,723,682 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
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 has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% 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 179,663 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 216 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 65% of its contemporaries.