↓ Skip to main content

Homeopathy for dementia

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2003
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 (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
twitter
61 tweeters
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages
video
2 video uploaders

Citations

dimensions_citation
28 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
56 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Homeopathy for dementia
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2003
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd003803
Pubmed ID
Authors

Robert W McCarney, James Warner, Peter Fisher, Robbert van Haselen

Abstract

Dementia is a common illness in older people and has major implications for individuals with the disease, their carers and society. A meta-analysis of population based studies in Europe found the prevalence of dementia in individuals over 65 to be 6.4%. Homeopathy (also spelt "homoeopathy") is a popular form of "complementary" or "alternative" treatment. Some studies have found evidence for efficacy of homeopathic treatment for some conditions, but any mechanism of action of the ultra molecular dilutions used in homeopathy is not comprehensible in terms of current scientific concepts. To evaluate the effectiveness and safety profile of homeopathically prepared medications used in treating dementia, as established by randomized controlled trials. The trials were identified from a search of the Specialized Register of the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group on 10 May 2002 using the terms alum*, homeop*, "nat sulph" and "natrum sulphate". This Register contains records from all major medical databases. In addition the reviewers searched CISCOM, AMED and Hom-Inform. Leading homeopathic researchers, practitioners and manufacturers were also contacted. All types of randomized controlled trials with a sample size of more than 20 were considered. The database searches resulted in one trial being identified. After examining the abstract, a paper copy was obtained and independently assessed for inclusion by RM and JW. There were no studies that fulfilled the criteria for inclusion and no data to present. In view of the absence of evidence it is not possible to comment on the use of homeopathy in treating dementia. The extent of homeopathic prescribing for people with dementia is not clear and so it is difficult to comment on the importance of conducting trials in this area.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 61 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 56 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 4%
Iceland 1 2%
United States 1 2%
Unknown 52 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 10 18%
Researcher 8 14%
Unspecified 8 14%
Student > Master 6 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 9%
Other 19 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 27%
Unspecified 12 21%
Social Sciences 7 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 7%
Other 14 25%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 65. 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 14 July 2019.
All research outputs
#269,889
of 13,643,788 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#692
of 10,695 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#262,255
of 12,966,024 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#665
of 9,779 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,643,788 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 10,695 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 12,966,024 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9,779 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 93% of its contemporaries.