↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Continuous and interrupted suturing techniques for repair of episiotomy or second-degree tears

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, November 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (51st percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
4 tweeters
facebook
3 Facebook pages
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Readers on

mendeley
248 Mendeley
Title
Continuous and interrupted suturing techniques for repair of episiotomy or second-degree tears
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, November 2012
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd000947.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christine Kettle, Therese Dowswell, Khaled MK Ismail

Abstract

Millions of women worldwide undergo perineal suturing after childbirth and the type of repair may have an impact on pain and healing. For more than 70 years, researchers have been suggesting that continuous non-locking suture techniques for repair of the vagina, perineal muscles and skin are associated with less perineal pain than traditional interrupted methods.

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.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 248 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
France 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 245 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 39 16%
Student > Master 31 13%
Student > Postgraduate 24 10%
Researcher 21 8%
Other 18 7%
Other 49 20%
Unknown 66 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 89 36%
Nursing and Health Professions 42 17%
Social Sciences 12 5%
Psychology 8 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 2%
Other 22 9%
Unknown 71 29%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 03 September 2022.
All research outputs
#2,962,409
of 22,165,427 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#5,618
of 12,198 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#35,645
of 296,585 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#232
of 474 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,165,427 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,198 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 29.9. 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 296,585 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 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 474 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 51% of its contemporaries.