↓ 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 (81st percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
42 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
404 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

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.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 404 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%
Denmark 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 398 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 67 17%
Student > Master 49 12%
Researcher 37 9%
Other 31 8%
Student > Postgraduate 31 8%
Other 92 23%
Unknown 97 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 161 40%
Nursing and Health Professions 31 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 15 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 13 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 3%
Other 55 14%
Unknown 118 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 06 May 2023.
All research outputs
#5,491,387
of 26,362,953 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#7,535
of 13,217 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#57,996
of 320,087 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#151
of 247 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,362,953 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,217 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.6. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% 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 320,087 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 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 247 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.