| Title |
Comparison of the accuracy of neutrophil CD64, procalcitonin, and C-reactive protein for sepsis identification: a systematic review and meta-analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Annals of Intensive Care, January 2019
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13613-018-0479-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Chun-Fu Yeh, Chin-Chieh Wu, Su-Hsun Liu, Kuan-Fu Chen |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 71 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 71 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 12 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 10 | 14% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 7 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 7% |
| Other | 8 | 11% |
| Unknown | 19 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 24 | 34% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 6% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 3 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 9 | 13% |
| Unknown | 25 | 35% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 14 September 2020.
All research outputs
#2,106,148
of 23,122,481 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Intensive Care
#261
of 1,055 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#51,517
of 438,093 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Intensive Care
#10
of 42 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,122,481 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,055 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% 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 438,093 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 42 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.