↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Antibiotics for community-acquired lower respiratory tract infections secondary to Mycoplasma pneumoniae in children

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2015
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 (87th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
8 tweeters
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
63 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
184 Mendeley
Title
Antibiotics for community-acquired lower respiratory tract infections secondary to Mycoplasma pneumoniae in children
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2015
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd004875.pub5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Samantha J Gardiner, John B Gavranich, Anne B Chang

Abstract

Mycoplasma pneumoniae (M. pneumoniae) is widely recognised as an important cause of community-acquired lower respiratory tract infection (LRTI) in children. Pulmonary manifestations are typically tracheobronchitis or pneumonia but M. pneumoniae is also implicated in wheezing episodes in both asthmatic and non-asthmatic individuals. Although antibiotics are used to treat LRTIs, a review of several major textbooks offers conflicting advice for using antibiotics in the management of M. pneumoniae LRTI in children.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 184 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%
Unknown 182 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 30 16%
Other 22 12%
Student > Master 20 11%
Researcher 16 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 8%
Other 47 26%
Unknown 34 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 86 47%
Nursing and Health Professions 15 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 3%
Psychology 5 3%
Other 18 10%
Unknown 49 27%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 18 September 2018.
All research outputs
#2,098,811
of 17,355,315 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#4,783
of 11,661 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#39,092
of 311,464 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#128
of 247 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,355,315 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,661 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 25.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% 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 311,464 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 247 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.