↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Spinal manipulation for dysmenorrhoea

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2006
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets
blogs
2 blogs
twitter
5 tweeters
facebook
2 Facebook pages
wikipedia
7 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
44 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
162 Mendeley
Title
Spinal manipulation for dysmenorrhoea
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2006
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd002119.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michelle Proctor, Wayne Hing, Trina C Johnson, Patricia A Murphy, Julie Brown

Abstract

Dysmenorrhoea refers to the occurrence of painful menstrual cramps of uterine origin and is a common gynaecological condition. One possible treatment is spinal manipulation therapy. One hypothesis is that mechanical dysfunction in certain vertebrae causes decreases spinal mobility. This could affect the sympathetic nerve supply to the blood vessels supplying the pelvic viscera, leading to dysmenorrhoea as a result of vasoconstriction. Manipulation of these vertebrae increases spinal mobility and may improve pelvic blood supply. Another hypothesis is that dysmenorrhoea is referred pain arising from musculoskeletal structures that share the same pelvic nerve pathways. The character of pain from musculoskeletal dysfunction can be very similar to gynaecological pain as it can present as cyclic pain altered by hormonal influences associated with menstruation.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 162 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 162 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 33 20%
Student > Bachelor 23 14%
Researcher 13 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 6%
Other 31 19%
Unknown 43 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 47 29%
Nursing and Health Professions 27 17%
Unspecified 7 4%
Psychology 6 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 2%
Other 21 13%
Unknown 50 31%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 46. 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 16 January 2023.
All research outputs
#770,870
of 22,971,207 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#1,608
of 12,335 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,049
of 65,871 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#5
of 70 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,971,207 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,335 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 30.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 65,871 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 70 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.