↓ 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 (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
5 blogs
twitter
4 X users
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
38 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
157 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.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 157 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 2 1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 152 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 22 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 11%
Student > Bachelor 16 10%
Researcher 13 8%
Student > Postgraduate 11 7%
Other 33 21%
Unknown 45 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 67 43%
Nursing and Health Professions 14 9%
Psychology 7 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 3%
Computer Science 2 1%
Other 10 6%
Unknown 53 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 34. 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 29 October 2022.
All research outputs
#1,211,503
of 25,837,817 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#2,507
of 13,149 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,666
of 121,812 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#8
of 100 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,837,817 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 13,149 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 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 121,812 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 100 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.