↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Machine perfusion preservation versus static cold storage for deceased donor kidney transplantation

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, March 2019
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 (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
17 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
66 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
166 Mendeley
Title
Machine perfusion preservation versus static cold storage for deceased donor kidney transplantation
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, March 2019
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd011671.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Samuel J Tingle, Rodrigo S Figueiredo, John AG Moir, Michael Goodfellow, David Talbot, Colin H Wilson

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 17 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 166 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 165 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 29 17%
Student > Bachelor 22 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 12%
Researcher 18 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 14 8%
Other 26 16%
Unknown 37 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 66 40%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 3%
Engineering 5 3%
Other 23 14%
Unknown 45 27%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 22 April 2021.
All research outputs
#1,981,845
of 19,172,905 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#4,553
of 11,941 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#54,417
of 328,582 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#19
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 19,172,905 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,941 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 27.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% 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 328,582 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 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.