↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Continuous local anaesthetic wound infusion for postoperative pain after midline laparotomy for colorectal resection in adults

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2019
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
10 tweeters
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
103 Mendeley
Title
Continuous local anaesthetic wound infusion for postoperative pain after midline laparotomy for colorectal resection in adults
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2019
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd012310.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sophie S Liang, Andrew J Ying, Eshan T Affan, Benedict F Kakala, Giovanni FM Strippoli, Alan Bullingham, Helen Currow, David W Dunn, Zeigfeld Yu-Ting Yeh

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 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 103 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 103 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 17 17%
Researcher 11 11%
Student > Bachelor 11 11%
Other 10 10%
Student > Postgraduate 9 9%
Other 19 18%
Unknown 26 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 34 33%
Nursing and Health Professions 17 17%
Environmental Science 2 2%
Computer Science 2 2%
Social Sciences 2 2%
Other 16 16%
Unknown 30 29%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 06 March 2020.
All research outputs
#3,325,645
of 17,175,498 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#6,025
of 11,634 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#93,485
of 333,656 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#13
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,175,498 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,634 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 24.7. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 333,656 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.