| Title |
Voriconazole versus amphotericin B or fluconazole in cancer patients with neutropenia
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, February 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd004707.pub3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Karsten Juhl Jørgensen, Peter C Gøtzsche, Christina S Dalbøge, Helle Krogh Johansen |
| Abstract |
Opportunistic fungal infections are a major cause of morbidity and mortality in neutropenic cancer patients and antifungal therapy is used both empirically and therapeutically in these patients. |
Twitter Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 128 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Denmark | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 126 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 17 | 13% |
| Researcher | 16 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 15 | 12% |
| Other | 13 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 11 | 9% |
| Other | 25 | 20% |
| Unknown | 31 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 53 | 41% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 6% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 8 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 6 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 3% |
| Other | 16 | 13% |
| Unknown | 33 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 29 April 2021.
All research outputs
#13,403,925
of 22,745,803 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#10,080
of 12,315 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#111,459
of 223,229 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#197
of 238 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,745,803 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,315 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 30.3. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% 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 223,229 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 238 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.