↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Pelvic floor muscle training for preventing and treating urinary and faecal incontinence in antenatal and postnatal women

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, May 2020
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 (96th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (57th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
twitter
107 tweeters
facebook
3 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
30 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
462 Mendeley
Title
Pelvic floor muscle training for preventing and treating urinary and faecal incontinence in antenatal and postnatal women
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, May 2020
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd007471.pub4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Stephanie J Woodley, Peter Lawrenson, Rhianon Boyle, June D Cody, Siv Mørkved, Ashleigh Kernohan, E Jean C Hay-Smith

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 107 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 462 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
Norway 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 459 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 78 17%
Student > Master 66 14%
Researcher 39 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 38 8%
Student > Postgraduate 30 6%
Other 79 17%
Unknown 132 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 115 25%
Nursing and Health Professions 108 23%
Sports and Recreations 18 4%
Social Sciences 15 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 2%
Other 48 10%
Unknown 147 32%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 92. 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 24 June 2021.
All research outputs
#299,961
of 18,897,820 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#595
of 11,887 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,148
of 290,232 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#9
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 18,897,820 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 11,887 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 26.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 290,232 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 96% 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 has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its contemporaries.