↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Aminoadamantanes versus other antiviral drugs for chronic hepatitis C

Overview of attention for article published in this source, June 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

1 tweeter


2 Dimensions

Readers on

112 Mendeley
1 CiteULike
Aminoadamantanes versus other antiviral drugs for chronic hepatitis C
Published by
John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, June 2014
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd011132.pub2
Pubmed ID

Lamers, Mieke H, Broekman, Mark, Drenth, Joost PH, Gluud, Christian


Hepatitis C virus infection affects around 3% of the world population or approximately 160 million people. A variable proportion (5% to 40%) of the infected people develop clinical symptoms. Hence, hepatitis C virus is a leading cause of liver-related morbidity and mortality with hepatic fibrosis, end-stage liver cirrhosis, and hepatocellular carcinoma as the dominant clinical sequelae. Combination therapy with pegylated (peg) interferon-alpha and ribavirin achieves sustained virological response (that is, undetectable hepatitis C virus RNA in serum by sensitivity testing six months after the end of treatment) in approximately 40% to 80% of treated patients, depending on viral genotype. Recently, a new class of drugs have emerged for hepatitis C infection, the direct acting antivirals, which in combination with standard therapy or alone can lead to sustained virological response in 80% or more of treated patients. Aminoadamantanes, mostly amantadine, are antiviral drugs used for the treatment of patients with chronic hepatitis C. We have previously systematically reviewed amantadine versus placebo or no intervention and found no significant effects of the amantadine on all-cause mortality or liver-related morbidity and on adverse events in patients with hepatitis C. Overall, we did not observe a significant effect of amantadine on sustained virological response. In this review, we systematically review aminoadamantanes versus other antiviral drugs.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 112 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 111 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 22 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 13%
Student > Postgraduate 12 11%
Student > Bachelor 9 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 7%
Other 19 17%
Unknown 27 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 42 38%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 4%
Psychology 4 4%
Social Sciences 3 3%
Other 12 11%
Unknown 36 32%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 24 December 2014.
All research outputs
of 12,612,419 outputs
Outputs from this source
of 10,376 outputs
Outputs of similar age
of 289,707 outputs
Outputs of similar age from this source
of 258 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,612,419 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,376 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.2. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% 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 289,707 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 258 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.