↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

Boceprevir and telaprevir for the treatment of chronic hepatitis C genotype 1 infection: an indirect comparison meta-analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management, March 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (53rd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (58th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
34 Mendeley
Title
Boceprevir and telaprevir for the treatment of chronic hepatitis C genotype 1 infection: an indirect comparison meta-analysis
Published in
Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management, March 2012
DOI 10.2147/tcrm.s29830
Pubmed ID
Authors

Edward Mills, Curtis Cooper, Eric Druyts, Thorlund, Jean Nachega, El Khoury, O'Regan

Abstract

The aim of this study was to examine the relative efficacy and safety of boceprevir and telaprevir, when used in combination with pegylated interferon alpha and ribavirin, using an indirect comparison meta-analysis.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Russia 1 3%
Unknown 33 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 24%
Other 5 15%
Student > Bachelor 5 15%
Student > Postgraduate 3 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 9%
Other 9 26%
Unknown 1 3%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 41%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 18%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 3 9%
Chemistry 2 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Other 7 21%
Unknown 1 3%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 17 June 2012.
All research outputs
#6,766,518
of 12,485,238 outputs
Outputs from Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
#405
of 922 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#53,854
of 119,420 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
#5
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,485,238 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 922 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. 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 119,420 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 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 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 58% of its contemporaries.