| Title |
A systematic review and meta-analysis of biological treatments targeting tumour necrosis factor α for sciatica
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
European Spine Journal, March 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00586-013-2739-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Nefyn H. Williams, Ruth Lewis, Nafees Ud Din, Hosam E. Matar, Deborah Fitzsimmons, Ceri J. Phillips, Alex Sutton, Kim Burton, Maggie Hendry, Sadia Nafees, Clare Wilkinson |
| Abstract |
Systematic review comparing biological agents, targeting tumour necrosis factor α, for sciatica with placebo and alternative interventions. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 States | 1 | 14% |
| Canada | 1 | 14% |
| Unknown | 5 | 71% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 71% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 14% |
| Scientists | 1 | 14% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 2% |
| Denmark | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 51 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 17% |
| Other | 7 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 13% |
| Researcher | 7 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 8% |
| Other | 9 | 17% |
| Unknown | 10 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 26 | 49% |
| Sports and Recreations | 3 | 6% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 4% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 7 | 13% |
| Unknown | 12 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 01 April 2015.
All research outputs
#2,038,094
of 22,703,044 outputs
Outputs from European Spine Journal
#180
of 4,603 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,657
of 197,767 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Spine Journal
#4
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,703,044 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,603 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 197,767 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 44 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 90% of its contemporaries.