↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Massage therapy for preventing pressure ulcers

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, June 2015
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 (74th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
twitter
9 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
184 Mendeley
Title
Massage therapy for preventing pressure ulcers
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, June 2015
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd010518.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Qinhong Zhang, Zhongren Sun, Jinhuan Yue

Abstract

Pressure ulcers affect approximately 10% of patients in hospitals and the elderly are at highest risk. Several studies have suggested that massage therapy may help to prevent the development of pressure ulcers, but these results are inconsistent. To assess the evidence for the effects of massage compared with placebo, standard care or other interventions for prevention of pressure ulcers in at-risk populations.The review sought to answer the following questions:Does massage reduce the incidence of pressure ulcers of any grade?Is massage safe in the short- and long-term? If not, what are the adverse events associated with massage? We searched the Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Register (8 January 2015), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2015, Issue 1), Ovid MEDLINE (1946 to 8 January 2015), Ovid MEDLINE (In-Process Other Non-Indexed Citations 8 January 2015), Ovid EMBASE (1974 to 8 January 2015), and EBSCO CINAHL (1982 to 8 January 2015). We did not apply date or language restrictions. We planned to include all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-randomised controlled trials (Q-RCTs) that evaluated the effects of massage therapy for the prevention of pressure ulcers. Our primary outcome was the proportion of people developing a new pressure ulcer of any grade. Two review authors independently carried out trial selection. Disagreements were resolved by discussion. No studies (RCTs or Q-RCTs) met the inclusion criteria. Therefore, neither a meta-analysis nor a narrative description of studies was possible. There are currently no studies eligible for inclusion in this review. It is, therefore, unclear whether massage therapy can prevent pressure ulcers.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 184 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 184 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 30 16%
Student > Bachelor 28 15%
Researcher 12 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 6%
Other 28 15%
Unknown 64 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 50 27%
Nursing and Health Professions 26 14%
Psychology 9 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 3%
Other 20 11%
Unknown 69 38%
Attention Score in Context

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 24 July 2023.
All research outputs
#1,512,764
of 25,604,262 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#3,233
of 13,148 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#18,267
of 278,073 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#73
of 283 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,604,262 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 13,148 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% 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 278,073 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 283 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 74% of its contemporaries.