| Title |
Paracervical local anaesthesia for cervical dilatation and uterine intervention
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, September 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd005056.pub3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Thumwadee Tangsiriwatthana, Ussanee S Sangkomkamhang, Pisake Lumbiganon, Malinee Laopaiboon |
| Abstract |
Cervical dilatation and uterine intervention can be performed under sedation, local or general anaesthesia for obstetrics and gynaecological conditions. Many gynaecologists use paracervical local anaesthesia but its effectiveness is unclear. This review was originally published in 2009 and was updated in 2013. |
Twitter Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 183 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 182 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 31 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 20 | 11% |
| Researcher | 15 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 13 | 7% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 13 | 7% |
| Other | 41 | 22% |
| Unknown | 50 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 86 | 47% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 18 | 10% |
| Psychology | 5 | 3% |
| Arts and Humanities | 3 | 2% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 1% |
| Other | 12 | 7% |
| Unknown | 57 | 31% |
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 19 July 2022.
All research outputs
#2,457,509
of 23,418,312 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#5,197
of 12,687 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#23,019
of 207,407 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#109
of 223 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,418,312 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 12,687 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 33.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% 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 207,407 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 223 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.