↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Complementary and alternative therapies for pain management in labour

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2006
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
7 news outlets
policy
1 policy source
twitter
6 tweeters
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
188 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
438 Mendeley
Title
Complementary and alternative therapies for pain management in labour
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2006
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd003521.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Caroline A Smith, Carmel T Collins, Allan M Cyna, Caroline A Crowther

Abstract

Many women would like to avoid pharmacological or invasive methods of pain management in labour and this may contribute towards the popularity of complementary methods of pain management. This review examined currently available evidence supporting the use of alternative and complementary therapies for pain management in labour.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 4 <1%
Canada 3 <1%
Switzerland 2 <1%
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Ireland 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 425 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 81 18%
Student > Bachelor 59 13%
Researcher 45 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 41 9%
Student > Postgraduate 32 7%
Other 91 21%
Unknown 89 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 151 34%
Nursing and Health Professions 82 19%
Psychology 28 6%
Social Sciences 26 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 14 3%
Other 40 9%
Unknown 97 22%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 66. 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 25 April 2018.
All research outputs
#398,281
of 17,856,357 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#873
of 11,777 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,936
of 225,804 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#39
of 484 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,856,357 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,777 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 25.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 225,804 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 484 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.