↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Antibiotic therapy for the treatment of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in non surgical wounds

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, November 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 (87th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (56th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
13 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
26 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
315 Mendeley
Title
Antibiotic therapy for the treatment of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in non surgical wounds
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, November 2013
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd010427.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kurinchi Selvan Gurusamy, Rahul Koti, Clare D Toon, Peter Wilson, Brian R Davidson, Gurusamy KS, Koti R, Toon CD, Wilson P, Davidson BR, Gurusamy, Kurinchi Selvan, Koti, Rahul, Toon, Clare D, Wilson, Peter, Davidson, Brian R

Abstract

Non surgical wounds include chronic ulcers (pressure or decubitus ulcers, venous ulcers, diabetic ulcers, ischaemic ulcers), burns and traumatic wounds. The prevalence of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) colonisation (i.e. presence of MRSA in the absence of clinical features of infection such as redness or pus discharge) or infection in chronic ulcers varies between 7% and 30%. MRSA colonisation or infection of non surgical wounds can result in MRSA bacteraemia (infection of the blood) which is associated with a 30-day mortality of about 28% to 38% and a one-year mortality of about 55%. People with non surgical wounds colonised or infected with MRSA may be reservoirs of MRSA, so it is important to treat them, however, we do not know the optimal antibiotic regimen to use in these cases.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 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 315 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Portugal 1 <1%
Austria 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Argentina 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 308 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 64 20%
Student > Master 42 13%
Researcher 33 10%
Student > Postgraduate 27 9%
Other 27 9%
Other 79 25%
Unknown 43 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 151 48%
Nursing and Health Professions 25 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 15 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 3%
Immunology and Microbiology 10 3%
Other 41 13%
Unknown 62 20%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 27 May 2017.
All research outputs
#2,120,025
of 16,516,981 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#4,859
of 11,520 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#33,798
of 266,948 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#51
of 117 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 16,516,981 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,520 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 24.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% 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 266,948 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 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 117 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.