↓ Skip to main content

Helmets for preventing injury in motorcycle riders

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2008
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 (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
5 news outlets
blogs
3 blogs
policy
2 policy sources
twitter
56 tweeters
facebook
3 Facebook pages
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
302 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
280 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
Helmets for preventing injury in motorcycle riders
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2008
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd004333.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Bette C Liu, Rebecca Ivers, Robyn Norton, Soufiane Boufous, Stephanie Blows, Sing Kai Lo

Abstract

Motorcycle crash victims form a high proportion of those killed or injured in road traffic crashes. Injuries to the head, following motorcycle crashes, are a common cause of severe morbidity and mortality. It seems intuitive that helmets should protect against head injuries but it has been argued that motorcycle helmet use decreases rider vision and increases neck injuries. This review will collate the current available evidence on helmets and their impact on mortality, and head, face and neck injuries following motorcycle crashes.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 56 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 280 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 2 <1%
Italy 2 <1%
Nigeria 2 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Kazakhstan 1 <1%
India 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Vietnam 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 268 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 57 20%
Researcher 46 16%
Student > Bachelor 38 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 35 13%
Student > Postgraduate 22 8%
Other 54 19%
Unknown 28 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 102 36%
Engineering 44 16%
Social Sciences 24 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 23 8%
Psychology 16 6%
Other 36 13%
Unknown 35 13%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 103. 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 February 2020.
All research outputs
#185,918
of 14,976,343 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#390
of 11,069 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,118
of 161,671 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#5
of 129 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,976,343 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,069 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 22.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 161,671 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 129 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.