You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Validity of the “Streitberger” Needle in a Chinese Population with Acupuncture: A Randomized, Single-Blinded, and Crossover Pilot Study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Evidence-based Complementary & Alternative Medicine (eCAM), August 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1155/2013/251603 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Chang-cai Xie, Xiu-yun Wen, Li Jiang, Min-jun Xie, Wen Bin Fu |
| Abstract |
We studied the validity of a "Streitberger" needle as a valid approach in a Chinese population with experience of acupuncture. Volunteers were recruited from students of the School of Acupuncture and Moxibustion, Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine. Sixty students receiving education in acupuncture theory and experience in practical acupuncture were tested in study determining whether needling with the placebo needle felt any different from conventional acupuncture. Outcomes included measures of penetration sensation, VAS ratings, and Deqi sensation questionnaire. As a result, needle penetration, VAS ratings for either needle and Deqi sensation were not significantly different between two kinds of needles. Our findings show that the use of "Streitberger" needle is credible in a Chinese population with acupuncture experience. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 46 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 10 | 22% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 13% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 11% |
| Researcher | 4 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 9 | 20% |
| Unknown | 9 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 19 | 41% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 9% |
| Neuroscience | 3 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 4% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 4 | 9% |
| Unknown | 13 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 16 July 2014.
All research outputs
#20,674,485
of 25,394,764 outputs
Outputs from Evidence-based Complementary & Alternative Medicine (eCAM)
#5,461
of 9,352 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#159,852
of 210,144 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Evidence-based Complementary & Alternative Medicine (eCAM)
#161
of 247 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,394,764 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,352 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.8. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 210,144 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 247 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.