| Title |
Intermittent versus continuous renal replacement therapy for acute renal failure in adults
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2007
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd003773.pub3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kannaiyan S Rabindranath, James Adams, Alison M MacLeod, Norman Muirhead |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 273 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 3 | 1% |
| Italy | 3 | 1% |
| United States | 3 | 1% |
| Colombia | 1 | <1% |
| Russia | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Greece | 1 | <1% |
| Japan | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 259 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 37 | 14% |
| Other | 36 | 13% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 32 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 29 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 27 | 10% |
| Other | 53 | 19% |
| Unknown | 59 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 147 | 54% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 21 | 8% |
| Social Sciences | 8 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 6 | 2% |
| Psychology | 5 | 2% |
| Other | 19 | 7% |
| Unknown | 67 | 25% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 28 March 2022.
All research outputs
#4,680,622
of 25,457,297 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#6,822
of 11,499 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#13,252
of 77,883 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#25
of 80 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,297 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
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 40th percentile – i.e., 40% 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 77,883 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 80 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.