↓ Skip to main content

Early Weight-Based Aggressive vs. Non-Aggressive Goal-Directed Fluid Resuscitation in the Early Phase of Acute Pancreatitis: An Open-Label Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial (The WATERFALL Trial)…

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Medicine, September 2020
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)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
21 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
39 Mendeley
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
Early Weight-Based Aggressive vs. Non-Aggressive Goal-Directed Fluid Resuscitation in the Early Phase of Acute Pancreatitis: An Open-Label Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial (The WATERFALL Trial), Design, and Rationale
Published in
Frontiers in Medicine, September 2020
DOI 10.3389/fmed.2020.00440
Pubmed ID
Authors

Federico Bolado, James L. Buxbaum, Alicia Vaillo-Rocamora, Karina Cárdenas-Jaén, Patrick Maisonneuve, Enrique de-Madaria

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 profiles of 21 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 39 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 39 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 18%
Student > Bachelor 5 13%
Student > Master 4 10%
Other 2 5%
Unspecified 1 3%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 17 44%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 36%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 5%
Arts and Humanities 1 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Unspecified 1 3%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 18 46%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. 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 12 November 2022.
All research outputs
#1,955,064
of 26,450,612 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Medicine
#569
of 7,580 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#50,763
of 429,350 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Medicine
#20
of 208 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,450,612 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,580 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 429,350 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 208 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.