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.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
| Title |
Interventions for drooling in children with cerebral palsy
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, November 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd008624.pub3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Margaret Walshe, Martine Smith, Lindsay Pennington |
| Abstract |
Drooling is a common problem for children with cerebral palsy (CP). This can be distressing for these children as well as for their parents and caregivers. The consequences of drooling include risk of social rejection, damp and soiled clothing, unpleasant odour, irritated chapped skin, mouth infections, dehydration, interference with speech, damage to books, communication aids, computers, and the risk of social isolation (Blasco 1992; Van der Burg 2006). A range of interventions exist that aim to reduce or eliminate drooling. There is a lack of consensus regarding which interventions are most effective for children with CP. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| South Africa | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 412 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Portugal | 1 | <1% |
| Sweden | 1 | <1% |
| Ireland | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 408 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 59 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 49 | 12% |
| Researcher | 43 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 34 | 8% |
| Other | 23 | 6% |
| Other | 82 | 20% |
| Unknown | 122 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 125 | 30% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 40 | 10% |
| Psychology | 23 | 6% |
| Unspecified | 18 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 11 | 3% |
| Other | 56 | 14% |
| Unknown | 139 | 34% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 05 February 2021.
All research outputs
#4,680,617
of 25,457,858 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#6,852
of 11,842 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#33,249
of 192,725 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#139
of 245 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,858 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,842 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 38.9. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% 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 192,725 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 245 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.