↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Carvedilol versus traditional, non‐selective beta‐blockers for adults with cirrhosis and gastroesophageal varices

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
53 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
173 Mendeley
Title
Carvedilol versus traditional, non‐selective beta‐blockers for adults with cirrhosis and gastroesophageal varices
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2018
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd011510.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Antony P Zacharias, Rebecca Jeyaraj, Lise Hobolth, Flemming Bendtsen, Lise Lotte Gluud, Marsha Y Morgan

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 173 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 173 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 18 10%
Student > Bachelor 18 10%
Student > Master 14 8%
Other 11 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 6%
Other 30 17%
Unknown 71 41%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 59 34%
Nursing and Health Professions 14 8%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 2%
Psychology 4 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 1%
Other 14 8%
Unknown 76 44%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 May 2024.
All research outputs
#6,631,958
of 26,308,718 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#8,092
of 13,206 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#108,753
of 366,569 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#158
of 220 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,308,718 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,206 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 34.9. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% 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 366,569 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 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 220 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.