↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Home-based therapy programmes for upper limb functional recovery following stroke

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, May 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
6 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
61 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
270 Mendeley
Title
Home-based therapy programmes for upper limb functional recovery following stroke
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, May 2012
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd006755.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Fiona Coupar, Alex Pollock, Lynn A Legg, Catherine Sackley, Paulette van Vliet

Abstract

With an increased focus on home-based stroke services and the undertaking of programmes, targeted at upper limb recovery within clinical practice, a systematic review of home-based therapy programmes for individuals with upper limb impairment following stroke was required.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Switzerland 2 <1%
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Canada 2 <1%
India 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 262 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 52 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 39 14%
Researcher 35 13%
Student > Bachelor 33 12%
Other 16 6%
Other 38 14%
Unknown 57 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 58 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 43 16%
Engineering 20 7%
Psychology 19 7%
Neuroscience 17 6%
Other 46 17%
Unknown 67 25%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 19 April 2019.
All research outputs
#6,846,115
of 22,785,242 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#8,520
of 12,314 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#48,468
of 163,929 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#107
of 178 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,785,242 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,314 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 30.4. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 163,929 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 178 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.