↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Once or twice daily versus three times daily amoxicillin with or without clavulanate for the treatment of acute otitis media

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
2 policy sources
twitter
62 tweeters
facebook
2 Facebook pages
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
129 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Once or twice daily versus three times daily amoxicillin with or without clavulanate for the treatment of acute otitis media
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2013
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd004975.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sanguansak Thanaviratananich, Malinee Laopaiboon, Patravoot Vatanasapt

Abstract

Acute otitis media (AOM) is a common problem in children, for which amoxicillin, with or without clavulanate, is frequently prescribed as a treatment of choice. The conventional recommendation is either three or four daily doses. However, nowadays it is frequently prescribed as once or twice daily doses. If once or twice daily amoxicillin, with or without clavulanate, is as effective for acute otitis media as three or four times a day, it may be more convenient to give the medication once or twice a day to children and hence improve compliance.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 62 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 129 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Chile 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Ecuador 1 <1%
Unknown 126 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 24 19%
Student > Bachelor 14 11%
Other 14 11%
Student > Master 13 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 7%
Other 29 22%
Unknown 26 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 55 43%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 6 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 3%
Other 17 13%
Unknown 31 24%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 47. 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 23 July 2021.
All research outputs
#605,477
of 19,188,609 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#1,385
of 11,943 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#8,329
of 287,199 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#17
of 136 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 19,188,609 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,943 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 27.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 287,199 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 136 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.