The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 25 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
| Title |
Complementary and alternative therapies for post‐caesarean pain
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, September 2020
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd011216.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Sandra A Zimpel, Maria Regina Torloni, Gustavo Jm Porfírio, Ronald Lg Flumignan, Edina Mk da Silva |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 8% |
| Saudi Arabia | 1 | 4% |
| Brazil | 1 | 4% |
| Kazakhstan | 1 | 4% |
| United States | 1 | 4% |
| Spain | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 18 | 72% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 17 | 68% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 12% |
| Scientists | 3 | 12% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 8% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 384 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 384 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 37 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 30 | 8% |
| Other | 20 | 5% |
| Researcher | 19 | 5% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 17 | 4% |
| Other | 49 | 13% |
| Unknown | 212 | 55% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 57 | 15% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 47 | 12% |
| Psychology | 15 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 7 | 2% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 6 | 2% |
| Other | 30 | 8% |
| Unknown | 222 | 58% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 28. 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 November 2023.
All research outputs
#1,452,521
of 26,163,973 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#2,940
of 13,188 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#39,035
of 428,533 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#54
of 172 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,163,973 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 13,188 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 428,533 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 172 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 68% of its contemporaries.