↓ Skip to main content

An evidence map of the effect of Tai Chi on health outcomes

Overview of attention for article published in Systematic Reviews, July 2016
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)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
7 news outlets
twitter
13 X users
facebook
7 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
104 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
457 Mendeley
Title
An evidence map of the effect of Tai Chi on health outcomes
Published in
Systematic Reviews, July 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13643-016-0300-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michele R. Solloway, Stephanie L. Taylor, Paul G. Shekelle, Isomi M. Miake-Lye, Jessica M. Beroes, Roberta M. Shanman, Susanne Hempel

Abstract

This evidence map describes the volume and focus of Tai Chi research reporting health outcomes. Originally developed as a martial art, Tai Chi is typically taught as a series of slow, low-impact movements that integrate the breath, mind, and physical activity to achieve greater awareness and a sense of well-being. The evidence map is based on a systematic review of systematic reviews. We searched 11 electronic databases from inception to February 2014, screened reviews of reviews, and consulted with topic experts. We used a bubble plot to graphically display clinical topics, literature size, number of reviews, and a broad estimate of effectiveness. The map is based on 107 systematic reviews. Two thirds of the reviews were published in the last five years. The topics with the largest number of published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were general health benefits (51 RCTs), psychological well-being (37 RCTs), interventions for older adults (31 RCTs), balance (27 RCTs), hypertension (18 RCTs), fall prevention (15 RCTs), and cognitive performance (11 RCTs). The map identified a number of areas with evidence of a potentially positive treatment effect on patient outcomes, including Tai Chi for hypertension, fall prevention outside of institutions, cognitive performance, osteoarthritis, depression, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, pain, balance confidence, and muscle strength. However, identified reviews cautioned that firm conclusions cannot be drawn due to methodological limitations in the original studies and/or an insufficient number of existing research studies. Tai Chi has been applied in diverse clinical areas, and for a number of these, systematic reviews have indicated promising results. The evidence map provides a visual overview of Tai Chi research volume and content. PROSPERO CRD42014009907.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 457 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 <1%
Unknown 455 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 69 15%
Student > Bachelor 58 13%
Researcher 38 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 38 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 33 7%
Other 80 18%
Unknown 141 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 77 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 75 16%
Sports and Recreations 40 9%
Psychology 31 7%
Social Sciences 20 4%
Other 61 13%
Unknown 153 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 72. 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 May 2022.
All research outputs
#503,377
of 22,994,508 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Reviews
#61
of 2,005 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#11,413
of 366,328 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Reviews
#5
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,994,508 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,005 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.8. 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 366,328 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 29 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.