↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Statins for non-alcoholic fatty liver disease and non-alcoholic steatohepatitis

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 (65th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
policy
1 policy source
twitter
6 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
125 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
188 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Statins for non-alcoholic fatty liver disease and non-alcoholic steatohepatitis
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2013
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd008623.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Layli Eslami, Shahin Merat, Reza Malekzadeh, Siavosh Nasseri-Moghaddam, Hermineh Aramin

Abstract

Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) are common causes of elevated liver enzymes in the general population. NASH and to some extent NAFLD have been associated with increased liver-related and all-cause mortality. No effective treatment is yet available. Recent reports have shown that the use of hydroxymethylglutaryl-coenzyme A (HMG-CoA) reductase inhibitors (statins) in patients with elevated plasma aminotransferases may result in normalisation of these liver enzymes. Whether this is a consistent effect or whether it can lead to improved clinical outcomes beyond normalisation of abnormal liver enzymes is not clear.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 188 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 <1%
Ireland 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 181 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 30 16%
Researcher 26 14%
Student > Bachelor 24 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 9%
Other 16 9%
Other 29 15%
Unknown 46 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 80 43%
Nursing and Health Professions 16 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 9 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 2%
Other 13 7%
Unknown 60 32%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. 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 05 July 2022.
All research outputs
#1,847,148
of 22,165,427 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#4,142
of 12,198 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#24,360
of 308,272 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#52
of 146 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,165,427 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,198 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 29.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% 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 308,272 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 146 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 65% of its contemporaries.