| Title |
Interventions for preventing nausea and vomiting in women undergoing regional anaesthesia for caesarean section
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, May 2021
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd007579.pub3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
James D Griffiths, Gillian ML Gyte, Phil A Popham, Kacey Williams, Shantini Paranjothy, Hannah K Broughton, Heather C Brown, Jane Thomas |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 30 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 4 | 13% |
| United States | 3 | 10% |
| France | 3 | 10% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 7% |
| Germany | 2 | 7% |
| Australia | 2 | 7% |
| Mexico | 1 | 3% |
| New Zealand | 1 | 3% |
| South Africa | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 10 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 22 | 73% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 6 | 20% |
| Scientists | 2 | 7% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 151 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 1 | <1% |
| Turkey | 1 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 148 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unspecified | 18 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 15 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 13 | 9% |
| Other | 7 | 5% |
| Researcher | 6 | 4% |
| Other | 24 | 16% |
| Unknown | 68 | 45% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 31 | 21% |
| Unspecified | 22 | 15% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 12 | 8% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 2% |
| Psychology | 3 | 2% |
| Other | 8 | 5% |
| Unknown | 72 | 48% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 23. 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 21 June 2022.
All research outputs
#1,570,646
of 24,796,076 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#3,455
of 12,977 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#39,695
of 437,190 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#51
of 149 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,796,076 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,977 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 437,190 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 149 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 65% of its contemporaries.