| 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
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 29 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 5 | 17% |
| United States | 2 | 7% |
| Brazil | 2 | 7% |
| Saudi Arabia | 1 | 3% |
| Kazakhstan | 1 | 3% |
| Zimbabwe | 1 | 3% |
| India | 1 | 3% |
| Canada | 1 | 3% |
| Ireland | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 4 | 14% |
| Unknown | 10 | 34% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 20 | 69% |
| Scientists | 4 | 14% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 10% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 7% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 357 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 357 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 37 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 29 | 8% |
| Other | 20 | 6% |
| Researcher | 19 | 5% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 17 | 5% |
| Other | 45 | 13% |
| Unknown | 190 | 53% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 53 | 15% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 44 | 12% |
| Psychology | 15 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 7 | 2% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 6 | 2% |
| Other | 32 | 9% |
| Unknown | 200 | 56% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 30. 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
#1,318,508
of 25,655,374 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#2,784
of 13,151 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#36,279
of 426,382 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#54
of 173 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,655,374 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 13,151 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% 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 426,382 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 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 173 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.