↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Perianal injectable bulking agents as treatment for faecal incontinence in adults

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, February 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
128 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
170 Mendeley
Title
Perianal injectable bulking agents as treatment for faecal incontinence in adults
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, February 2013
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd007959.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yasuko Maeda, Søren Laurberg, Christine Norton

Abstract

Faecal incontinence is a complex and distressing condition with significant medical and social implications. Injection of perianal bulking agents has been used to treat the symptoms of passive faecal incontinence. However, various agents have been used without a standardised technique and the supposed benefit of the treatment is largely anecdotal with a limited clinical research base.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 170 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Malaysia 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 168 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 24 14%
Student > Bachelor 22 13%
Researcher 16 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 8%
Student > Postgraduate 12 7%
Other 34 20%
Unknown 48 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 58 34%
Nursing and Health Professions 20 12%
Psychology 8 5%
Social Sciences 7 4%
Sports and Recreations 4 2%
Other 15 9%
Unknown 58 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 19 June 2017.
All research outputs
#7,432,988
of 25,595,500 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#8,987
of 13,156 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#58,456
of 205,561 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#144
of 211 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,595,500 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,156 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.8. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% 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 205,561 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 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 211 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.