↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Economic burden of inpatient and outpatient antibiotic treatment for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus complicated skin and soft-tissue infections: a comparison of linezolid, vancomycin…

Overview of attention for article published in ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research: CEOR, September 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
28 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
63 Mendeley
Title
Economic burden of inpatient and outpatient antibiotic treatment for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus complicated skin and soft-tissue infections: a comparison of linezolid, vancomycin, and daptomycin
Published in
ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research: CEOR, September 2013
DOI 10.2147/ceor.s46991
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jennifer M Stephens, Xin Gao, Dipen A Patel, Bram G Verheggen, Ahmed Shelbaya, Seema Haider

Abstract

Previous economic analyses evaluating treatment of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) complicated skin and soft-tissue infections (cSSTI) failed to include all direct treatment costs such as outpatient parenteral antibiotic therapy (OPAT). Our objective was to develop an economic model from a US payer perspective that includes all direct inpatient and outpatient costs incurred by patients with MRSA cSSTI receiving linezolid, vancomycin, or daptomycin.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 3%
Brazil 2 3%
Australia 1 2%
China 1 2%
Unknown 57 90%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 16%
Researcher 9 14%
Other 8 13%
Student > Bachelor 7 11%
Student > Postgraduate 6 10%
Other 13 21%
Unknown 10 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 33%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 11%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 8%
Social Sciences 5 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 3%
Other 11 17%
Unknown 12 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 30 September 2013.
All research outputs
#17,348,916
of 25,457,858 outputs
Outputs from ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research: CEOR
#331
of 525 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#134,358
of 212,692 outputs
Outputs of similar age from ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research: CEOR
#12
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,858 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 525 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.0. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 212,692 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.