| Title |
Antiseptics for burns
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd011821.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Gill Norman, Janice Christie, Zhenmi Liu, Maggie J Westby, Jayne M Jefferies, Thomas Hudson, Jacky Edwards, Devi Prasad Mohapatra, Ibrahim A Hassan, Jo C Dumville |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 31 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 6 | 19% |
| Canada | 2 | 6% |
| Spain | 2 | 6% |
| New Zealand | 2 | 6% |
| Belgium | 1 | 3% |
| United States | 1 | 3% |
| Italy | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 16 | 52% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 25 | 81% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 4 | 13% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 3% |
| Scientists | 1 | 3% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 531 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 531 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 81 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 63 | 12% |
| Researcher | 42 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 37 | 7% |
| Other | 30 | 6% |
| Other | 90 | 17% |
| Unknown | 188 | 35% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 150 | 28% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 62 | 12% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 24 | 5% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 12 | 2% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 11 | 2% |
| Other | 63 | 12% |
| Unknown | 209 | 39% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 31. 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 20 December 2022.
All research outputs
#1,179,409
of 24,195,945 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#2,589
of 12,864 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#24,215
of 316,155 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#81
of 269 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,195,945 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,864 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 33.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% 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 316,155 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 269 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 70% of its contemporaries.