↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Auditory-verbal therapy for promoting spoken language development in children with permanent hearing impairments

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, March 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (77th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
8 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
203 Mendeley
Title
Auditory-verbal therapy for promoting spoken language development in children with permanent hearing impairments
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, March 2014
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd010100.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christopher G Brennan-Jones, Jo White, Robert W Rush, James Law

Abstract

Congenital or early-acquired hearing impairment poses a major barrier to the development of spoken language and communication. Early detection and effective (re)habilitative interventions are essential for parents and families who wish their children to achieve age-appropriate spoken language. Auditory-verbal therapy (AVT) is a (re)habilitative approach aimed at children with hearing impairments. AVT comprises intensive early intervention therapy sessions with a focus on audition, technological management and involvement of the child's caregivers in therapy sessions; it is typically the only therapy approach used to specifically promote avoidance or exclusion of non-auditory facial communication. The primary goal of AVT is to achieve age-appropriate spoken language and for this to be used as the primary or sole method of communication. AVT programmes are expanding throughout the world; however, little evidence can be found on the effectiveness of the intervention.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 203 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 203 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 43 21%
Student > Bachelor 35 17%
Researcher 20 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 14 7%
Other 41 20%
Unknown 31 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 56 28%
Nursing and Health Professions 38 19%
Psychology 20 10%
Social Sciences 13 6%
Linguistics 10 5%
Other 29 14%
Unknown 37 18%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 21 March 2015.
All research outputs
#3,920,437
of 16,246,190 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#6,346
of 11,451 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#42,910
of 193,390 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#114
of 201 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 16,246,190 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,451 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 24.0. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% 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 193,390 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 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 201 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.