↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Haloperidol versus first-generation antipsychotics for the treatment of schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders

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 (92nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (68th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
21 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
57 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
279 Mendeley
Title
Haloperidol versus first-generation antipsychotics for the treatment of schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2015
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd009831.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Markus Dold, Myrto T Samara, Chunbo Li, Magdolna Tardy, Stefan Leucht

Abstract

Haloperidol is worldwide one of the most frequently used antipsychotic drugs with a very high market share. Previous narrative, unsystematic reviews found no differences in terms of efficacy between the various first-generation ("conventional", "typical") antipsychotic agents. This established the unproven psychopharmacological assumption of a comparable efficacy between the first-generation antipsychotic compounds codified in textbooks and treatment guidelines. Because this assumption contrasts with the clinical impression, a high-quality systematic review appeared highly necessary.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 21 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 279 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Norway 1 <1%
Unknown 276 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 51 18%
Student > Bachelor 45 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 25 9%
Researcher 21 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 8%
Other 40 14%
Unknown 76 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 66 24%
Psychology 31 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 23 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 15 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 13 5%
Other 42 15%
Unknown 89 32%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. 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 20 June 2017.
All research outputs
#1,347,225
of 19,862,972 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#3,297
of 11,985 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,873
of 309,968 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#79
of 247 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 19,862,972 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,985 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 27.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% 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 309,968 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.