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 oropharyngeal dysphagia in children with neurological impairment
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd009456.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Angela T Morgan, Pamela Dodrill, Elizabeth C Ward |
| Abstract |
Oropharyngeal dysphagia encompasses problems with the oral preparatory phase of swallowing (chewing and preparing the food), oral phase (moving the food or fluid posteriorly through the oral cavity with the tongue into the back of the throat) and pharyngeal phase (swallowing the food or fluid and moving it through the pharynx to the oesophagus). Populations of children with neurological impairment who commonly experience dysphagia include, but are not limited to, those with acquired brain impairment (for example, cerebral palsy, traumatic brain injury, stroke), genetic syndromes (for example, Down syndrome, Rett syndrome) and degenerative conditions (for example, myotonic dystrophy). |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 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 | 4 | 29% |
| Japan | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 9 | 64% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 9 | 64% |
| Scientists | 2 | 14% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 14% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 7% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 688 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| South Africa | 1 | <1% |
| Denmark | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 682 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 113 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 73 | 11% |
| Researcher | 66 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 65 | 9% |
| Other | 40 | 6% |
| Other | 131 | 19% |
| Unknown | 200 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 204 | 30% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 100 | 15% |
| Psychology | 36 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 23 | 3% |
| Neuroscience | 20 | 3% |
| Other | 77 | 11% |
| Unknown | 228 | 33% |
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 March 2023.
All research outputs
#3,638,157
of 25,457,858 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#6,186
of 11,842 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#26,421
of 193,432 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#115
of 239 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 85th 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 44th percentile – i.e., 44% 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 239 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 51% of its contemporaries.