↓ Skip to main content

Haemoglobin and haematocrit targets for the anaemia of chronic kidney disease

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2006
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 (90th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
63 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
179 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Haemoglobin and haematocrit targets for the anaemia of chronic kidney disease
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2006
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd003967.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Giovanni FM Strippoli, Sankar D Navaneethan, Jonathan C Craig, Suetonia C Palmer

Abstract

Anaemia affects 60% to 80% of patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) reduces quality of life and is a risk factor for early death. Treatment options are blood transfusion, erythropoietin (EPO) and darbepoetin alfa. Recently higher haemoglobin (Hb) and haematocrit (HCT) targets have been widely advocated because of positive associations with improved survival and quality of life from observational studies.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 179 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Australia 2 1%
United States 1 <1%
Brunei Darussalam 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Unknown 174 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 20 11%
Student > Master 18 10%
Student > Bachelor 18 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 7%
Student > Postgraduate 10 6%
Other 28 16%
Unknown 72 40%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 63 35%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 7%
Social Sciences 6 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 2%
Other 13 7%
Unknown 75 42%
Attention Score in Context

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 15 August 2023.
All research outputs
#3,498,233
of 26,794,081 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#6,077
of 13,278 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#8,379
of 88,633 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#18
of 66 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,794,081 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,278 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 34.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% 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 88,633 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 66 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 72% of its contemporaries.