↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Exercise for intermittent claudication

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

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
22 tweeters
googleplus
2 Google+ users

Citations

dimensions_citation
154 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
254 Mendeley
Title
Exercise for intermittent claudication
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2014
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd000990.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Risha Lane, Brian Ellis, Lorna Watson, Gillian C Leng

Abstract

Exercise programmes are a relatively inexpensive, low-risk option compared with other more invasive therapies for leg pain on walking (intermittent claudication (IC)). This is an update of a review first published in 1998.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 22 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 254 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 3 1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Czechia 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 246 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 46 18%
Student > Bachelor 34 13%
Researcher 33 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 33 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 21 8%
Other 49 19%
Unknown 38 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 123 48%
Nursing and Health Professions 24 9%
Sports and Recreations 14 6%
Psychology 12 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 5%
Other 21 8%
Unknown 48 19%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 26. 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 17 December 2020.
All research outputs
#965,235
of 17,960,381 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#2,492
of 11,791 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12,092
of 201,602 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#46
of 212 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,960,381 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,791 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 25.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% 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 201,602 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 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 212 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.