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 |
Interventions for dysphagia and nutritional support in acute and subacute stroke
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd000323.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Chamila Geeganage, Jessica Beavan, Sharon Ellender, Philip MW Bath |
| Abstract |
Dysphagia (swallowing problems) are common after stroke and can cause chest infection and malnutrition. Dysphagic, and malnourished, stroke patients have a poorer outcome. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Indonesia | 1 | 25% |
| Australia | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 473 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | <1% |
| United States | 2 | <1% |
| Spain | 2 | <1% |
| Ireland | 1 | <1% |
| Ghana | 1 | <1% |
| South Africa | 1 | <1% |
| Colombia | 1 | <1% |
| Singapore | 1 | <1% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 2 | <1% |
| Unknown | 459 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 92 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 60 | 13% |
| Researcher | 59 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 43 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 42 | 9% |
| Other | 88 | 19% |
| Unknown | 89 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 176 | 37% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 74 | 16% |
| Neuroscience | 34 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 22 | 5% |
| Psychology | 12 | 3% |
| Other | 51 | 11% |
| Unknown | 104 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 08 December 2018.
All research outputs
#3,430,408
of 25,457,858 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#6,035
of 11,842 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#24,663
of 193,432 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#113
of 241 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,858 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,842 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 38.9. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% 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 193,432 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 241 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 53% of its contemporaries.