↓ Skip to main content

Anticholinergic drugs versus non‐drug active therapies for non‐neurogenic overactive bladder syndrome in adults

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (57th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
3 X users
peer_reviews
1 peer review site
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
129 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
332 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
Anticholinergic drugs versus non‐drug active therapies for non‐neurogenic overactive bladder syndrome in adults
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2012
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd003193.pub4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Bhavan Prasad Rai, June D Cody, Ammar Alhasso, Laurence Stewart

Abstract

Overactive bladder syndrome is defined as urgency with or without urgency incontinence, usually with frequency and nocturia. Pharmacotherapy with anticholinergic drugs is often the first line medical therapy, either alone or as an adjunct to various non-pharmacological therapies after conservative options such as reducing intake of caffeine drinks have been tried. Non-pharmacologic therapies consist of bladder training, pelvic floor muscle training with or without biofeedback, behavioural modification, electrical stimulation and surgical interventions.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 332 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Argentina 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 327 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 43 13%
Other 39 12%
Student > Bachelor 35 11%
Researcher 34 10%
Student > Postgraduate 21 6%
Other 70 21%
Unknown 90 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 121 36%
Nursing and Health Professions 33 10%
Psychology 10 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 10 3%
Unspecified 10 3%
Other 45 14%
Unknown 103 31%
Attention Score in Context

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 06 December 2023.
All research outputs
#3,642,374
of 25,595,500 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#6,354
of 13,156 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#34,502
of 287,251 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#85
of 197 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,595,500 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 13,156 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% 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 287,251 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 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 197 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 57% of its contemporaries.