↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Bed rest for pressure ulcer healing in wheelchair users

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2016
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 (90th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (68th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
27 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
168 Mendeley
Title
Bed rest for pressure ulcer healing in wheelchair users
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2016
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd011999.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Zena EH Moore, Menno T van Etten, Jo C Dumville

Abstract

Pressure ulcers, which are localised injury to the skin or underlying tissue, or both, occur when people are unable to reposition themselves to relieve pressure on bony prominences. Pressure ulcers are often difficult to heal, painful, and impact negatively on the individual's quality of life. International guidelines suggest bed rest as a component of the treatment strategy to manage pressure ulcers among wheelchair users. The potential benefits and risks need to be considered when assessing the effectiveness of bed rest as an intervention for treating pressure ulcers in this population. Therefore, it was important to search and appraise existing research evidence in order to determine the impact of bed rest on the healing of pressure ulcers in wheelchair users. To assess the impact of bed rest on pressure ulcer healing, in wheelchair users, of any age, who are living or being cared for in any setting. In October 2016 we searched: the Cochrane Wounds Specialised Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library); Ovid MEDLINE (including In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, MEDLINE Daily and Epub Ahead of Print); Ovid EMBASE and EBSCO CINAHL Plus. We also searched clinical trials registries and conference proceedings and for ongoing and unpublished studies. There were no restrictions with respect to language, date of publication or study setting. We considered randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cluster-RCTs that evaluated the impact of bed rest on healing pressure ulcers in wheelchair users. Two review authors independently assessed titles and abstracts of the studies identified by the search strategy for their eligibility. We identified no studies that met the inclusion criteria. We set out to evaluate the research evidence, from randomised controlled trials, of the impact of bed rest on pressure ulcer healing in wheelchair users. No study met the inclusion criteria. It is uncertain whether bed rest makes a difference to the healing of pressure ulcers in wheelchair users. Well-designed trials addressing important clinical, quality of life and economic outcomes are required.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 27 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 168 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 167 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 34 20%
Researcher 16 10%
Student > Bachelor 16 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 7%
Other 23 14%
Unknown 56 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 35 21%
Medicine and Dentistry 33 20%
Social Sciences 7 4%
Psychology 7 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 2%
Other 23 14%
Unknown 59 35%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 21. 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 28 October 2021.
All research outputs
#1,367,200
of 20,983,497 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#3,261
of 12,064 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#30,001
of 315,122 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#52
of 167 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 20,983,497 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 12,064 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 28.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% 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 315,122 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 167 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 68% of its contemporaries.