↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Glucocorticoid with cyclophosphamide for paraquat-induced lung fibrosis

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

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (56th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
35 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
107 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Glucocorticoid with cyclophosphamide for paraquat-induced lung fibrosis
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, August 2014
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd008084.pub4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Luying Ryan Li, Emma Sydenham, Bhuwan Chaudhary, Deirdre Beecher, Chao You

Abstract

Paraquat is an effective and widely used herbicide but is also a lethal poison. In many developing countries paraquat is widely available and inexpensive, making poisoning prevention difficult. However most of the people who become poisoned from paraquat have taken it as a means of suicide.Standard treatment for paraquat poisoning both prevents further absorption and reduces the load of paraquat in the blood through haemoperfusion or haemodialysis. The effectiveness of standard treatments is extremely limited.The immune system plays an important role in exacerbating paraquat-induced lung fibrosis. Immunosuppressive treatment using glucocorticoid and cyclophosphamide in combination is being developed and studied.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 107 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 <1%
Unknown 106 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 18 17%
Student > Bachelor 13 12%
Researcher 11 10%
Other 8 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 7%
Other 28 26%
Unknown 21 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 47 44%
Psychology 10 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 7%
Social Sciences 4 4%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 3 3%
Other 10 9%
Unknown 26 24%

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 15 February 2019.
All research outputs
#8,066,619
of 14,330,171 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#8,681
of 10,948 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#98,808
of 233,983 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#211
of 246 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,330,171 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,948 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.7. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% 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 233,983 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 246 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.