↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Non-pharmacological interventions for preventing venous insufficiency in a standing worker population

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 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
6 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
124 Mendeley
Title
Non-pharmacological interventions for preventing venous insufficiency in a standing worker population
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2013
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd006345.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lindsay Robertson, Su Ern Yeoh, Dinanda N Kolbach

Abstract

Chronic venous insufficiency (CVI) is a common problem, affecting up to 50% of the population in industrialised countries. It is a chronic condition which, if untreated, can progress to serious complications that in turn can interfere with working ability. Standing at work is a known risk factor for CVI, yet the true effect of non-pharmacological preventive strategies remains unknown. This is an update of a review first published in 2012.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 124 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 123 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 16%
Student > Master 20 16%
Student > Bachelor 19 15%
Researcher 12 10%
Student > Postgraduate 7 6%
Other 26 21%
Unknown 20 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 43 35%
Nursing and Health Professions 23 19%
Social Sciences 6 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 6 5%
Psychology 5 4%
Other 17 14%
Unknown 24 19%

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 20 October 2019.
All research outputs
#4,746,988
of 16,046,747 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#7,410
of 11,371 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#48,767
of 172,593 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#60
of 103 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 16,046,747 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 11,371 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 23.8. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% 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 172,593 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 103 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.