↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Early versus late initiation of epidural analgesia for labour

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2014
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 (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (97th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
6 news outlets
blogs
5 blogs
policy
2 policy sources
twitter
86 X users
facebook
24 Facebook pages
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
123 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
256 Mendeley
Title
Early versus late initiation of epidural analgesia for labour
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2014
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd007238.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ban Leong Sng, Wan Ling Leong, Yanzhi Zeng, Fahad Javaid Siddiqui, Pryseley N Assam, Yvonne Lim, Edwin SY Chan, Alex T Sia

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 86 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 256 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Unknown 253 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 38 15%
Other 28 11%
Student > Bachelor 24 9%
Student > Postgraduate 23 9%
Researcher 22 9%
Other 52 20%
Unknown 69 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 101 39%
Nursing and Health Professions 42 16%
Psychology 9 4%
Social Sciences 4 2%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 2%
Other 15 6%
Unknown 81 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 155. 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 25 December 2023.
All research outputs
#263,195
of 25,381,864 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#436
of 12,999 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,416
of 263,221 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#6
of 231 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,381,864 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,999 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 263,221 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 231 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 97% of its contemporaries.