↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Snake antivenom for snake venom induced consumption coagulopathy

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

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

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
26 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
77 Mendeley
Title
Snake antivenom for snake venom induced consumption coagulopathy
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, June 2015
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd011428.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kalana Maduwage, Nick A Buckley, H Janaka de Silva, David G Lalloo, Geoffrey K Isbister

Abstract

Snake venom induced consumption coagulopathy is a major systemic effect of envenoming. Observational studies suggest that antivenom improves outcomes for venom induced consumption coagulopathy in some snakebites and not others. However, the effectiveness of snake antivenom in all cases of venom induced consumption coagulopathy is controversial. To assess the effect of snake antivenom as a treatment for venom induced consumption coagulopathy in people with snake bite. The search was done on 30 January 2015. We searched the Cochrane Injuries Group's Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library), Ovid MEDLINE(R), Ovid MEDLINE(R) In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid MEDLINE(R) Daily and Ovid OLDMEDLINE(R), Embase Classic+Embase (OvidSP), three other sources, clinical trials registers, and we also screened reference lists. All completed, published or unpublished, randomised, controlled trials with a placebo or no treatment arm, where snake antivenom was administered for venom induced consumption coagulopathy in humans with snake bites. Two authors reviewed the identified trials and independently applied the selection criteria. No studies met the inclusion criteria for this review. Randomised placebo-controlled trials are required to investigate the effectiveness of snake antivenom for clinically relevant outcomes in patients with venom induced consumption coagulopathy resulting from snake bite. Although ethically difficult, the routine administration of a treatment that has a significant risk of anaphylaxis cannot continue without strong evidence of benefit.

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 77 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
South Africa 1 1%
Unknown 76 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 19 25%
Researcher 10 13%
Student > Bachelor 10 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 9%
Other 5 6%
Other 16 21%
Unknown 10 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 35 45%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 6 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 5%
Psychology 3 4%
Other 11 14%
Unknown 13 17%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 11 September 2021.
All research outputs
#5,198,085
of 18,908,606 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#7,484
of 11,886 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#65,891
of 243,470 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#185
of 256 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 18,908,606 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,886 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 26.7. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% 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 243,470 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 256 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.