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 |
Conservative prevention and management of pelvic organ prolapse in women
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd003882.pub4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Suzanne Hagen, Diane Stark |
| Abstract |
Pelvic organ prolapse is common, and some degree of prolapse is seen in 50% of parous women. Women with prolapse can experience a variety of pelvic floor symptoms. Treatments include surgery, mechanical devices and conservative management. Conservative management approaches, such as giving lifestyle advice and delivering pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT), are often used in cases of mild to moderate prolapse. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2004, and previously updated in 2006. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 50% |
| Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of | 1 | 25% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 551 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 4 | <1% |
| Spain | 2 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Portugal | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 542 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 94 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 78 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 43 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 41 | 7% |
| Researcher | 34 | 6% |
| Other | 119 | 22% |
| Unknown | 142 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 197 | 36% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 95 | 17% |
| Psychology | 14 | 3% |
| Social Sciences | 12 | 2% |
| Sports and Recreations | 10 | 2% |
| Other | 59 | 11% |
| Unknown | 164 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 79. 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 September 2023.
All research outputs
#539,036
of 25,457,858 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#952
of 11,499 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,745
of 247,349 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#7
of 209 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,858 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 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 has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 247,349 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 209 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 96% of its contemporaries.