↓ Skip to main content

Intra‐articular lignocaine versus intravenous analgesia with or without sedation for manual reduction of acute anterior shoulder dislocation in adults

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2011
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 (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
5 blogs
twitter
4 X users
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
38 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
151 Mendeley
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.
Title
Intra‐articular lignocaine versus intravenous analgesia with or without sedation for manual reduction of acute anterior shoulder dislocation in adults
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2011
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd004919.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Abel Wakai, Ronan O'Sullivan, Aileen McCabe

Abstract

There is conflicting evidence regarding the use of intra-articular lignocaine injection for the closed manual reduction of acute anterior shoulder dislocations. A systematic review may help cohere the conflicting evidence.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 151 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 2 1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 146 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 22 15%
Student > Bachelor 16 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 10%
Researcher 13 9%
Student > Postgraduate 11 7%
Other 32 21%
Unknown 42 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 66 44%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 9%
Psychology 6 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 3%
Computer Science 2 1%
Other 10 7%
Unknown 50 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 34. 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 29 October 2022.
All research outputs
#1,195,000
of 25,457,858 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#2,493
of 11,842 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,596
of 120,465 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#8
of 99 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 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% 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 has done well, scoring higher than 80% 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 120,465 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 99 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 91% of its contemporaries.