↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Transcutaneous electric nerve stimulation (TENS) for cancer pain in adults

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, March 2012
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 (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
15 tweeters
facebook
4 Facebook pages
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
119 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
264 Mendeley
Title
Transcutaneous electric nerve stimulation (TENS) for cancer pain in adults
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, March 2012
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd006276.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Adam Hurlow, Michael I Bennett, Karen A Robb, Mark I Johnson, Karen H Simpson, Stephen G Oxberry

Abstract

Cancer-related pain is complex and multi-dimensional but the mainstay of cancer pain management has predominantly used a biomedical approach. There is a need for non-pharmacological and innovative approaches. Transcutaneous Electric Nerve Stimulation (TENS) may have a role in pain management but the effectiveness of TENS is currently unknown. This is an update of the original review published in Issue 3, 2008.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 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 264 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 2 <1%
Colombia 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Unknown 260 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 32 12%
Student > Bachelor 32 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 8%
Other 20 8%
Researcher 20 8%
Other 65 25%
Unknown 73 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 77 29%
Nursing and Health Professions 42 16%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 4%
Unspecified 9 3%
Psychology 8 3%
Other 38 14%
Unknown 79 30%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 24. 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 18 September 2021.
All research outputs
#1,309,711
of 22,053,184 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#3,072
of 12,173 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#7,314
of 143,455 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#9
of 102 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,053,184 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,173 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 29.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% 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 143,455 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 102 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.