↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Manual therapy for asthma

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2005
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 (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
3 blogs
twitter
6 tweeters
facebook
3 Facebook pages
wikipedia
26 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
95 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
298 Mendeley
Title
Manual therapy for asthma
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2005
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd001002.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Maria A Hondras, Klaus Linde, Arthur P Jones

Abstract

A variety of manual therapies with similar postulated biologic mechanisms of action are commonly used to treat patients with asthma. Manual therapy practitioners are also varied, including physiotherapists, respiratory therapists, chiropractic and osteopathic physicians. A systematic review across disciplines is warranted.

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 298 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Switzerland 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 292 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 44 15%
Student > Bachelor 37 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 7%
Researcher 19 6%
Other 16 5%
Other 65 22%
Unknown 96 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 93 31%
Nursing and Health Professions 46 15%
Unspecified 9 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 3%
Social Sciences 8 3%
Other 32 11%
Unknown 101 34%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 31. 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 22 February 2023.
All research outputs
#1,113,816
of 23,419,482 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#2,515
of 12,687 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,384
of 58,632 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#8
of 50 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,419,482 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% 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 done well, scoring higher than 80% 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 58,632 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 50 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.