↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Cordyceps sinensis (a traditional Chinese medicine) for kidney transplant recipients

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 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 (85th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
12 tweeters
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
101 Mendeley
Title
Cordyceps sinensis (a traditional Chinese medicine) for kidney transplant recipients
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2015
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd009698.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tao Hong, Minghua Zhang, Junming Fan

Abstract

Kidney transplantation is the treatment of choice for patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD). Rising ESKD prevalence has substantially increased numbers of kidney transplants performed. Maintenance immunosuppression is long-term treatment to prevent acute rejection and deterioration of graft function. Although immunosuppressive treatment using drugs such as calcineurin inhibitors (CNIs, such as cyclosporin A (CsA) or tacrolimus) reduce acute rejection rates, long-term allograft survival rates are not significantly enhanced. CNI-related adverse effects contribute to reduced quality of life among kidney transplant recipients. Adjuvant immunosuppressive therapies that could offer a synergetic immunosuppressive effect, while minimising toxicity and reducing side effects, have been explored recently. Cordyceps sinensis, (Cordyceps) a traditional Chinese medicine, is used as an adjuvant immunosuppressive agent in maintenance treatment for kidney transplantation recipients in China, but there is no consensus about its use as an adjuvant immunosuppressive treatment for kidney transplantation recipients. This review aimed to evaluate the benefits and potential adverse effects of Cordyceps as an adjuvant immunosuppressive treatment for kidney transplant recipients. We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Specialised Register through contact with the Trials Search Co-ordinator to 7 September 2015 using search terms relevant to this review. We also searched Chinese language databases and other resources. We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs evaluating the benefits and potential side effects of Cordyceps sinensis for kidney transplant recipients, irrespective of blinding or publication language. An inclusion criterion was that baseline immunosuppressive therapy must be the same in all study arms. Two authors extracted data. We derived risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous data and mean differences (MD) for continuous data with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Our review included five studies (six reports; 447 participants) that assessed Cordyceps. Limited reporting of study methods and data meant that all included studies were assessed as having unclear risks of bias. The studies investigated Cordyceps compared with azathioprine (AZA) (4 studies, 265 participants) and Cordyceps plus low dose CsA versus standard dose CsA (1 study, 182 participants).Compared with AZA, Cordyceps showed no significant difference in graft or patient survival, but improved graft function and may reduce acute rejection episodes. Anaemia, leucopenia, and liver function improved, and incidence of infection may also be reduced.Compared with low dose CsA versus standard dose CsA, Cordyceps did not demonstrate any statistically significant differences in patient survival, graft loss, acute rejection or allograft function. There was limited low quality evidence to suggest benefits in pulmonary infection, serum albumin, serum uric acid levels, CNI nephrotoxicity and hepatotoxicity.None of the included studies reported on quality of life, and follow-up was short-term (three months to one year). Given the limited number of small studies, and high risk of bias, results should be interpreted with caution. Although there were some favourable aspects associated with Cordyceps, longer-term studies are needed to clarify any benefit-harm trade-off. Future studies should investigate the use of Cordyceps in combination with other immunosuppressive agents such as tacrolimus, mycophenolate mofetil or induction therapy. Such studies also need to be appropriately sized and powered.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 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 101 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
India 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Unknown 99 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 18 18%
Researcher 14 14%
Other 12 12%
Student > Bachelor 12 12%
Student > Postgraduate 6 6%
Other 16 16%
Unknown 23 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 41 41%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 5%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 4 4%
Other 10 10%
Unknown 29 29%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 17 August 2020.
All research outputs
#2,274,878
of 18,679,853 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#4,959
of 11,843 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#43,239
of 293,784 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#159
of 268 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 18,679,853 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,843 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 26.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% 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 293,784 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 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 268 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.