The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 196 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
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 |
Consensus practice guidelines on interventions for cervical spine (facet) joint pain from a multispecialty international working group
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Regional Anesthesia & Pain Medicine, November 2021
|
| DOI | 10.1136/rapm-2021-103031 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Robert W Hurley, Meredith C B Adams, Meredith Barad, Arun Bhaskar, Anuj Bhatia, Andrea Chadwick, Timothy R Deer, Jennifer Hah, W Michael Hooten, Narayan R Kissoon, David Wonhee Lee, Zachary Mccormick, Jee Youn Moon, Samer Narouze, David A Provenzano, Byron J Schneider, Maarten van Eerd, Jan Van Zundert, Mark S Wallace, Sara M Wilson, Zirong Zhao, Steven P Cohen |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 24 | 12% |
| Spain | 9 | 5% |
| Canada | 6 | 3% |
| Saudi Arabia | 5 | 3% |
| Netherlands | 3 | 2% |
| Italy | 3 | 2% |
| Indonesia | 2 | 1% |
| Kuwait | 2 | 1% |
| Turkey | 2 | 1% |
| Other | 17 | 9% |
| Unknown | 123 | 63% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 142 | 72% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 26 | 13% |
| Scientists | 25 | 13% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 3 | 2% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 113 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 113 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 12 | 11% |
| Other | 8 | 7% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 7% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 6 | 5% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 4% |
| Other | 22 | 19% |
| Unknown | 52 | 46% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 35 | 31% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 9 | 8% |
| Neuroscience | 4 | 4% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 3% |
| Sports and Recreations | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 5 | 4% |
| Unknown | 55 | 49% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 186. 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 20 March 2024.
All research outputs
#224,744
of 26,160,558 outputs
Outputs from Regional Anesthesia & Pain Medicine
#18
of 2,641 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,962
of 443,743 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Regional Anesthesia & Pain Medicine
#2
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,160,558 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,641 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 443,743 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 34 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 94% of its contemporaries.