↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Traditional Chinese medicinal herbs for the treatment of idiopathic chronic fatigue and chronic fatigue syndrome

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2018
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 (87th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
18 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
88 Mendeley
Title
Traditional Chinese medicinal herbs for the treatment of idiopathic chronic fatigue and chronic fatigue syndrome
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2018
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd006348.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Denise Adams, Taixiang Wu, Xunzhe Yang, Shusheng Tai, Sunita Vohra

Timeline
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 18 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 88 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 1%
Ireland 1 1%
Unknown 86 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 15 17%
Researcher 9 10%
Student > Master 8 9%
Librarian 6 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 6%
Other 21 24%
Unknown 24 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 32 36%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 11%
Social Sciences 4 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 2%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 2%
Other 11 13%
Unknown 27 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. 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 03 June 2020.
All research outputs
#2,255,342
of 26,163,973 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#4,527
of 13,188 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#45,516
of 363,038 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#103
of 215 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,163,973 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,188 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% 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 363,038 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 215 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 52% of its contemporaries.