↓ Skip to main content

Best practice guidelines for idiopathic nephrotic syndrome: recommendations versus reality

Overview of attention for article published in Pediatric Nephrology, August 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (65th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (89th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
52 Mendeley
Title
Best practice guidelines for idiopathic nephrotic syndrome: recommendations versus reality
Published in
Pediatric Nephrology, August 2014
DOI 10.1007/s00467-014-2903-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Andrea Pasini, Gabriella Aceto, Anita Ammenti, Gianluigi Ardissino, Vitalba Azzolina, Alberto Bettinelli, Elena Cama, Sante Cantatore, Antonella Crisafi, Giovanni Conti, Maria D’Agostino, Alessandra Dozza, Alberto Edefonti, Carmelo Fede, Elena Groppali, Chiara Gualeni, Alessandra Lavacchini, Marta Lepore, Silvio Maringhini, Paola Mariotti, Marco Materassi, Francesca Mencarelli, Giovanni Messina, Amata Negri, Marina Piepoli, Fiammetta Ravaglia, Angela Simoni, Laura Spagnoletta, Giovanni Montini

Abstract

The optimal therapeutic regimen for managing childhood idiopathic nephrotic syndrome (INS) is still under debate. We have evaluated the choice of steroid regimen and of symptomatic treatment adopted by pediatricians and pediatric nephrologists in a large number of centers as the first step towards establishing a shared protocol

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 52 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 52 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 9 17%
Student > Bachelor 8 15%
Student > Master 6 12%
Student > Postgraduate 5 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 10%
Other 19 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 34 65%
Unspecified 7 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 4%
Other 3 6%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 21 July 2016.
All research outputs
#6,292,836
of 12,222,672 outputs
Outputs from Pediatric Nephrology
#866
of 1,916 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#70,522
of 207,747 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Pediatric Nephrology
#10
of 85 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,222,672 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,916 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% 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 207,747 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 85 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.