↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Rituximab for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 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 (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source
twitter
5 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
32 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
229 Mendeley
Title
Rituximab for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2013
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd009130.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Dian He, Rui Guo, Fubo Zhang, Chao Zhang, Shuai Dong, Hongyu Zhou

Abstract

This is an update of the Cochrane review "Rituximab for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis" (first published in The Cochrane Library 2011, Issue 12).More than 80% of individuals with multiple sclerosis (MS) experience a relapsing-remitting disease course. Approximately 10 years after disease onset, an estimated 50% of individuals with relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS) convert to secondary progressive MS. MS causes a major socioeconomic burden for the individual patient and for society. Effective treatment that reduces relapse frequency and prevents progression could impact both costs and quality of life and help to reduce the socioeconomic burden of MS. Alternative and more effective MS treatments with new modes of action and good safety are needed to expand the current treatment repertoire. It has been shown that B lymphocytes are involved in the pathophysiology of MS and rituximab lyses B-cells via complement-dependent cytotoxicity and antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity. Current clinical trials are evaluating the role of rituximab as a B-cell depletion therapy in the treatment of RRMS.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 229 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 1%
Brazil 2 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 222 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 31 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 29 13%
Student > Master 28 12%
Student > Bachelor 24 10%
Student > Postgraduate 20 9%
Other 47 21%
Unknown 50 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 89 39%
Nursing and Health Professions 19 8%
Neuroscience 12 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 9 4%
Other 27 12%
Unknown 61 27%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. 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 17 February 2021.
All research outputs
#1,475,867
of 18,666,194 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#3,616
of 11,841 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,673
of 283,095 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#39
of 129 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 18,666,194 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 11,841 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 26.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% 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 283,095 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 129 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 70% of its contemporaries.