| Title |
Menatetrenone versus alfacalcidol in the treatment of Chinese postmenopausal women with osteoporosis: a multicenter, randomized, double-blinded, double-dummy, positive drug-controlled clinical trial
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Interventions in Aging, January 2014
|
| DOI | 10.2147/cia.s54107 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Xiao-Ping Xing, Yan Jiang, Zhen-Lin Zhang, Zhong-Lan Zhang, Han-Min Zhu, Yi-Yong Wu, Qun Cheng, Feng-Li Wu, Jian-Li Liu, Wei Yu, Xun-Wu Meng |
| Abstract |
To evaluate whether the efficacy and safety of menatetrenone for the treatment of osteoporosis is noninferior to alfacalcidol in Chinese postmenopausal women. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 3 | 75% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 69 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 1 | 1% |
| Brazil | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 67 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 13 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 12% |
| Other | 6 | 9% |
| Researcher | 5 | 7% |
| Other | 14 | 20% |
| Unknown | 13 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 21 | 30% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 9 | 13% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 6 | 9% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 4 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 8 | 12% |
| Unknown | 18 | 26% |
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 13 February 2023.
All research outputs
#13,527,710
of 23,342,092 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Interventions in Aging
#896
of 1,866 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#163,615
of 308,165 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Interventions in Aging
#20
of 54 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,342,092 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,866 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% 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 308,165 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 54 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 61% of its contemporaries.