↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Infraclavicular brachial plexus block for regional anaesthesia of the lower arm

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, August 2013
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 (89th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (65th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
20 tweeters
f1000
1 research highlight platform

Citations

dimensions_citation
41 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
112 Mendeley
Title
Infraclavicular brachial plexus block for regional anaesthesia of the lower arm
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, August 2013
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd005487.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ki Jinn Chin, Husni Alakkad, Sanjib D Adhikary, Mandeep Singh

Abstract

Several approaches exist to produce local anaesthetic blockade of the brachial plexus. It is not clear which is the technique of choice for providing surgical anaesthesia of the lower arm, although infraclavicular blockade (ICB) has several purported advantages. We therefore performed a systematic review of ICB compared to the other brachial plexus blocks (BPBs). This review was originally published in 2010 and was updated in 2013.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 20 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 112 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 112 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 15 13%
Student > Master 12 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 11%
Student > Bachelor 11 10%
Student > Postgraduate 8 7%
Other 23 21%
Unknown 31 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 62 55%
Psychology 6 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 2%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 <1%
Other 2 2%
Unknown 34 30%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 31 October 2022.
All research outputs
#2,316,262
of 22,590,459 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#4,908
of 12,288 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#19,669
of 179,372 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#37
of 106 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,590,459 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,288 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 30.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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 179,372 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 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 106 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.