↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Biologics for rheumatoid arthritis: an overview of Cochrane reviews

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2009
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
191 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
146 Mendeley
Title
Biologics for rheumatoid arthritis: an overview of Cochrane reviews
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2009
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd007848.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Singh JA, Christensen R, Wells GA, Suarez-Almazor ME, Buchbinder R, Lopez-Olivo MA, Tanjong Ghogomu E, Tugwell P, Jasvinder A Singh, Robin Christensen, George A Wells, Maria E Suarez‐Almazor, Rachelle Buchbinder, Maria Angeles Lopez‐Olivo, Elizabeth Tanjong Ghogomu, Peter Tugwell

Abstract

The biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) are very effective in treating rheumatoid arthritis (RA), however there is a lack of head-to-head comparison studies.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 146 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Portugal 1 <1%
Colombia 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Finland 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Sri Lanka 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
China 1 <1%
Other 1 <1%
Unknown 136 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 34 23%
Researcher 24 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 16%
Student > Bachelor 11 8%
Student > Postgraduate 10 7%
Other 31 21%
Unknown 12 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 80 55%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 12 8%
Psychology 8 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 3%
Other 15 10%
Unknown 20 14%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 October 2016.
All research outputs
#4,663,998
of 15,833,192 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#7,351
of 11,299 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#78,946
of 290,552 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#177
of 244 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,833,192 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,299 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 23.5. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% 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 290,552 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 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 244 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.