↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Methods of preventing bacterial sepsis and wound complications after liver transplantation

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, March 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
29 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
203 Mendeley
Title
Methods of preventing bacterial sepsis and wound complications after liver transplantation
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, March 2014
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd006660.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kurinchi Selvan Gurusamy, Myura Nagendran, Brian R Davidson

Abstract

Bacterial sepsis and wound complications after liver transplantation increase mortality, morbidity, or hospital stay and are likely to increase overall transplant costs. All liver transplantation patients receive antibiotic prophylaxis. This is an update of our 2008 Cochrane systematic review on the same topic in which we identified seven randomised clinical trials.

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.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 203 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
India 1 <1%
Unknown 200 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 28 14%
Researcher 27 13%
Student > Master 24 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 7%
Student > Postgraduate 11 5%
Other 44 22%
Unknown 54 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 77 38%
Nursing and Health Professions 20 10%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 10 5%
Unspecified 8 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 2%
Other 18 9%
Unknown 65 32%

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 July 2014.
All research outputs
#14,655,561
of 22,758,963 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#10,563
of 12,314 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#123,934
of 221,312 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#213
of 239 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,758,963 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,314 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 30.4. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% 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 221,312 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 239 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.