↓ Skip to main content

The effectiveness of long-needle acupuncture at acupoints BL30 and BL35 for CP/CPPS: a randomized controlled pilot study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine, May 2017
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 (88th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
6 tweeters
facebook
2 Facebook pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
31 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
The effectiveness of long-needle acupuncture at acupoints BL30 and BL35 for CP/CPPS: a randomized controlled pilot study
Published in
BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine, May 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12906-017-1768-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Minjie Zhou, Mingyue Yang, Lei Chen, Chao Yu, Wei Zhang, Jun Ji, Chi Chen, Xueyong Shen, Jian Ying

Abstract

The chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS) is one of the commonest chronic inflammatory diseases in adult men, for which acupuncture has been used to relieve related symptoms. The present study aimed to evaluate the therapeutic effect of the long-needle acupuncture on CP/CPPS. A randomized traditional acupuncture-controlled single blind study was conducted on 77 patients who were randomized into long-needle acupuncture (LA) and traditional acupuncture (TA) groups. The patients received six sessions of acupuncture for 2 weeks and a follow-up was scheduled at week 24. The primary outcome was measured by the total National Institutes of Health-Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index (NIH-CPSI) score at week 2. Four domains of the NIH-CPSI (urination, pain or discomfort, effects of symptoms, and quality of life) and the clinical efficacy score served as the secondary outcome. The total NIH-CPSI score at week 2 and week 24 was significantly improved in the LA group compared with the TA group. LA significantly improved urination, pain or discomfort, the effects of symptoms, and the quality of life at week 2 and week 24 and patients undergoing LA treatment had a higher clinical efficacy score. Needling at the BL30 and BL35 using LA benefits patients with CP/CPPS. The study was registered at the Chinese Clinical Trial Register ( ChiCTR-ICR-15006138 ).

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 31 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 26%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 16%
Student > Postgraduate 4 13%
Researcher 4 13%
Other 3 10%
Other 3 10%
Unknown 4 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 52%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 10%
Psychology 1 3%
Computer Science 1 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Other 5 16%
Unknown 4 13%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. 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 22 August 2017.
All research outputs
#768,526
of 11,642,880 outputs
Outputs from BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine
#179
of 2,415 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#31,776
of 267,337 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine
#2
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,642,880 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,415 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 267,337 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 33 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.