↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Hypnosis for induction of labour

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, August 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 (88th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (57th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
12 tweeters
facebook
11 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
149 Mendeley
Title
Hypnosis for induction of labour
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, August 2014
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd010852.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Daisuke Nishi, Miyako N Shirakawa, Erika Ota, Nobutsugu Hanada, Rintaro Mori

Abstract

Induction of labour using pharmacological and mechanical methods can increase complications. Complementary and alternative medicine methods including hypnosis may have the potential to provide a safe alternative option for the induction of labour. However, the effectiveness of hypnosis for inducing labour has not yet been fully evaluated.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 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 149 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 149 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 24 16%
Student > Bachelor 23 15%
Researcher 16 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 6%
Other 22 15%
Unknown 42 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 45 30%
Nursing and Health Professions 17 11%
Psychology 16 11%
Social Sciences 9 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 2%
Other 11 7%
Unknown 48 32%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 07 March 2016.
All research outputs
#2,209,290
of 21,366,128 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#4,790
of 12,040 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#23,979
of 214,065 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#88
of 206 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,366,128 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,040 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 29.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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 214,065 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 206 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its contemporaries.