↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) for chronic pain - an overview of Cochrane Reviews

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2019
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 (94th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (55th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
twitter
49 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
32 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
129 Mendeley
Title
Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) for chronic pain - an overview of Cochrane Reviews
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2019
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd011890.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

William Gibson, Benedict M Wand, Catherine Meads, Mark J Catley, Neil E O'Connell

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 49 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 129 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 129 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 20 16%
Student > Master 19 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 9%
Other 10 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 7%
Other 23 18%
Unknown 36 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 37 29%
Nursing and Health Professions 23 18%
Neuroscience 4 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 3%
Environmental Science 3 2%
Other 19 15%
Unknown 39 30%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 46. 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 05 May 2020.
All research outputs
#565,874
of 17,635,820 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#1,365
of 11,724 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,755
of 277,472 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#10
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,635,820 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,724 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 25.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 277,472 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 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 55% of its contemporaries.