↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Comparison of routes for achieving parenteral access with a focus on the management of patients with Ebola virus disease

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, February 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 (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
twitter
7 tweeters
facebook
4 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
30 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
154 Mendeley
Title
Comparison of routes for achieving parenteral access with a focus on the management of patients with Ebola virus disease
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, February 2015
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd011386.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Katharine Ker, Gavin Tansley, Deirdre Beecher, Anders Perner, Haleema Shakur, Tim Harris, Ian Roberts

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 154 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Australia 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 149 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 29 19%
Student > Master 23 15%
Researcher 18 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 8%
Other 9 6%
Other 39 25%
Unknown 24 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 58 38%
Nursing and Health Professions 26 17%
Psychology 6 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 3%
Social Sciences 4 3%
Other 17 11%
Unknown 38 25%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 21. 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 10 March 2015.
All research outputs
#665,411
of 12,527,219 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#2,162
of 8,923 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#16,171
of 215,958 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#66
of 243 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,527,219 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,923 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% 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 215,958 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 243 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 72% of its contemporaries.