↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Conservative prevention and management of pelvic organ prolapse in women

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2011
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 (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
8 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
4 tweeters
wikipedia
7 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
206 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
430 Mendeley
Title
Conservative prevention and management of pelvic organ prolapse in women
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2011
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd003882.pub4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Suzanne Hagen, Diane Stark

Abstract

Pelvic organ prolapse is common, and some degree of prolapse is seen in 50% of parous women. Women with prolapse can experience a variety of pelvic floor symptoms. Treatments include surgery, mechanical devices and conservative management. Conservative management approaches, such as giving lifestyle advice and delivering pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT), are often used in cases of mild to moderate prolapse. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2004, and previously updated in 2006.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 430 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 4 <1%
Spain 2 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Unknown 421 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 80 19%
Student > Master 69 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 43 10%
Student > Postgraduate 37 9%
Researcher 32 7%
Other 94 22%
Unknown 75 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 181 42%
Nursing and Health Professions 79 18%
Psychology 14 3%
Social Sciences 11 3%
Sports and Recreations 10 2%
Other 43 10%
Unknown 92 21%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 80. 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 April 2019.
All research outputs
#342,883
of 18,767,621 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#696
of 11,857 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,505
of 233,724 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#24
of 502 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 18,767,621 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,857 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 26.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 233,724 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 502 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 95% of its contemporaries.