↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Evaluating the cost utility of racecadotril for the treatment of acute watery diarrhea in children: the RAWD model

Overview of attention for article published in ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research: CEOR, April 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
45 Mendeley
Title
Evaluating the cost utility of racecadotril for the treatment of acute watery diarrhea in children: the RAWD model
Published in
ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research: CEOR, April 2012
DOI 10.2147/ceor.s31238
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tamlyn Anne Rautenberg, Ute Zerwes, Douglas Foerster, Rick Aultman

Abstract

The safety and efficacy of racecadotril to treat acute watery diarrhea (AWD) in children is well established, however its cost effectiveness for infants and children in Europe has not yet been determined.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 1 2%
Unknown 44 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 18%
Researcher 8 18%
Student > Master 6 13%
Student > Bachelor 5 11%
Other 3 7%
Other 10 22%
Unknown 5 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 18 40%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 16%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 7%
Unspecified 2 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 4%
Other 6 13%
Unknown 7 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 March 2013.
All research outputs
#8,127,820
of 25,806,080 outputs
Outputs from ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research: CEOR
#184
of 527 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#52,567
of 173,865 outputs
Outputs of similar age from ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research: CEOR
#3
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,806,080 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 527 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% 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 173,865 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 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 6 of them.