↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Direct thrombin inhibitors versus vitamin K antagonists or low molecular weight heparins for prevention of venous thromboembolism following total hip or knee replacement

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2010
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (63rd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
252 Mendeley
Title
Direct thrombin inhibitors versus vitamin K antagonists or low molecular weight heparins for prevention of venous thromboembolism following total hip or knee replacement
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2010
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd005981.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Carlos A Salazar, German Malaga, Giuliana Malasquez

Timeline
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 252 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Colombia 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Korea, Republic of 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Slovenia 1 <1%
Russia 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 243 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 34 13%
Researcher 32 13%
Student > Bachelor 30 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 23 9%
Student > Postgraduate 18 7%
Other 62 25%
Unknown 53 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 119 47%
Nursing and Health Professions 21 8%
Social Sciences 13 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 4%
Engineering 5 2%
Other 21 8%
Unknown 62 25%
Attention Score in Context

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 02 May 2019.
All research outputs
#8,296,727
of 25,457,297 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#8,927
of 11,499 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#37,024
of 102,892 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#53
of 79 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,297 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 66th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,499 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 40.0. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% 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 102,892 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 63% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 79 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.