↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Intra-articular lignocaine versus intravenous analgesia with or without sedation for manual reduction of acute anterior shoulder dislocation in adults

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2011
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 (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
4 blogs
twitter
2 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
29 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
122 Mendeley
Title
Intra-articular lignocaine versus intravenous analgesia with or without sedation for manual reduction of acute anterior shoulder dislocation in adults
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2011
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd004919.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Abel Wakai, Ronan O'Sullivan, Aileen McCabe

Abstract

There is conflicting evidence regarding the use of intra-articular lignocaine injection for the closed manual reduction of acute anterior shoulder dislocations. A systematic review may help cohere the conflicting evidence.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 122 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 2 2%
Spain 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 117 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 22 18%
Student > Bachelor 15 12%
Student > Postgraduate 12 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 10%
Researcher 12 10%
Other 27 22%
Unknown 22 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 63 52%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 9%
Psychology 5 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 2%
Other 9 7%
Unknown 27 22%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 27. 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 11 November 2020.
All research outputs
#902,469
of 17,687,978 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#2,346
of 11,732 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#7,941
of 222,663 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#91
of 460 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,687,978 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 11,732 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 25.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% 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 222,663 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 460 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.