↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Banding ligation versus beta-blockers for primary prevention in oesophageal varices in adults

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, August 2012
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 (88th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (69th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
128 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
126 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
Title
Banding ligation versus beta-blockers for primary prevention in oesophageal varices in adults
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, August 2012
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd004544.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lise Lotte Gluud, Aleksander Krag

Abstract

Non-selective beta-blockers are used as a first-line treatment for primary prevention in patients with medium- to high-risk oesophageal varices. The effect of non-selective beta-blockers on mortality is debated and many patients experience adverse events. Trials on banding ligation versus non-selective beta-blockers for patients with oesophageal varices and no history of bleeding have reached equivocal results.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 1 <1%
India 1 <1%
Guatemala 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 121 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 17 13%
Other 17 13%
Student > Postgraduate 16 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 10%
Student > Bachelor 12 10%
Other 37 29%
Unknown 14 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 80 63%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 4%
Social Sciences 2 2%
Psychology 2 2%
Other 8 6%
Unknown 24 19%

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 16 May 2021.
All research outputs
#2,331,535
of 19,368,131 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#5,033
of 11,931 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#16,150
of 144,188 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#25
of 81 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 19,368,131 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 11,931 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 27.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% 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 144,188 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 81 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 69% of its contemporaries.