↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

What is this page? Embed badge

Debridement for surgical wounds

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
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

patent
1 patent
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
34 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
130 Mendeley
Summary Patents Wikipedia Dimensions citations
Title
Debridement for surgical wounds
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, September 2013
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd006214.pub4
Pubmed ID
24008995
Authors

Fiona Smith, Nancy Dryburgh, Jayne Donaldson, Melloney Mitchell

Abstract

Surgical wounds that become infected are often debrided because clinicians believe that removal of this necrotic or infected tissue will expedite wound healing. There are numerous methods available but no consensus on which one is most effective for surgical wounds.

View on publisher site

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 130 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 130 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 15 12%
Researcher 14 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 13 10%
Student > Bachelor 12 9%
Student > Postgraduate 10 8%
Other 33 25%
Unknown 33 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 53 41%
Nursing and Health Professions 19 15%
Psychology 6 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 2%
Computer Science 2 2%
Other 10 8%
Unknown 37 28%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 04 August 2020.
All research outputs
#4,888,730
of 23,517,535 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#7,377
of 12,738 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#42,239
of 198,532 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#144
of 238 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,517,535 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 76th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,738 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 33.0. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% 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 198,532 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 238 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.

This page is hosted by Altmetric on behalf of Cochrane Library.