↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Massage, reflexology and other manual methods for pain management in labour

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, February 2012
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 (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
twitter
17 X users
facebook
6 Facebook pages
wikipedia
11 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
91 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
315 Mendeley
Title
Massage, reflexology and other manual methods for pain management in labour
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, February 2012
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd009290.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Caroline A Smith, Kate M Levett, Carmel T Collins, Leanne Jones

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 manual healing methods including massage and reflexology for pain management in labour.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 17 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 315 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 3 <1%
United Kingdom 3 <1%
Canada 2 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Colombia 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Greece 1 <1%
Unknown 303 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 59 19%
Student > Bachelor 54 17%
Researcher 31 10%
Other 25 8%
Student > Postgraduate 24 8%
Other 72 23%
Unknown 50 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 110 35%
Nursing and Health Professions 78 25%
Psychology 23 7%
Social Sciences 13 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 3%
Other 26 8%
Unknown 57 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 36. 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 15 July 2023.
All research outputs
#1,112,304
of 25,385,864 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#2,296
of 12,891 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#7,203
of 259,444 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#18
of 215 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,864 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,891 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 36.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 259,444 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 97% 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 done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.