↓ 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

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
37 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
205 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

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 205 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 196 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 34 17%
Researcher 31 15%
Student > Bachelor 25 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 9%
Student > Postgraduate 18 9%
Other 54 26%
Unknown 24 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 109 53%
Nursing and Health Professions 17 8%
Social Sciences 14 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 6 3%
Other 17 8%
Unknown 33 16%

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
#4,398,897
of 14,780,221 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#7,301
of 11,052 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#78,881
of 281,482 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#170
of 236 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,780,221 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 11,052 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 22.5. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% 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 281,482 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 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 236 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.