↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Acupuncture for functional dyspepsia

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 (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
46 tweeters
facebook
4 Facebook pages
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
49 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
176 Mendeley
Title
Acupuncture for functional dyspepsia
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2014
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd008487.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lei Lan, Fang Zeng, Guan J Liu, Li Ying, Xi Wu, Mailan Liu, Fan-rong Liang

Abstract

Functional dyspepsia (FD) has been a worldwide complaint. More effective therapies are needed with fewer adverse effects than are seen with conventional medications. Acupuncture, as a traditional therapeutic method, has been widely used for functional gastrointestinal disorders in the East. Manual acupuncture and electroacupuncture have been recognized treatments for FD, but to date, no robust evidence has been found for the effectiveness and safety of these interventions in the treatment of this condition.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 46 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 176 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 2 1%
Spain 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 172 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 28 16%
Researcher 23 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 10%
Student > Bachelor 17 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 13 7%
Other 31 18%
Unknown 46 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 63 36%
Nursing and Health Professions 21 12%
Psychology 15 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 3%
Social Sciences 5 3%
Other 17 10%
Unknown 50 28%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 69. 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 26 September 2019.
All research outputs
#408,987
of 18,891,791 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#859
of 11,887 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,282
of 222,127 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#18
of 244 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 18,891,791 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,887 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 26.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 222,127 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 244 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 92% of its contemporaries.