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 |
Continuous and interrupted suturing techniques for repair of episiotomy or second‐degree tears
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, November 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd000947.pub3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Christine Kettle, Therese Dowswell, Khaled MK Ismail |
| Abstract |
Millions of women worldwide undergo perineal suturing after childbirth and the type of repair may have an impact on pain and healing. For more than 70 years, researchers have been suggesting that continuous non-locking suture techniques for repair of the vagina, perineal muscles and skin are associated with less perineal pain than traditional interrupted methods. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 1 | 25% |
| Mexico | 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 308 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Italy | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 305 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 41 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 31 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 27 | 9% |
| Researcher | 24 | 8% |
| Other | 21 | 7% |
| Other | 55 | 18% |
| Unknown | 109 | 35% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 95 | 31% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 49 | 16% |
| Social Sciences | 12 | 4% |
| Psychology | 8 | 3% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 5 | 2% |
| Other | 24 | 8% |
| Unknown | 115 | 37% |
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 16 September 2023.
All research outputs
#3,577,420
of 25,457,297 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#6,116
of 11,499 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#25,470
of 192,725 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#117
of 233 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,297 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,499 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 40.0. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% 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 192,725 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 233 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.