↓ Skip to main content

Helmets for preventing head and facial injuries in bicyclists

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 1999
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 (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (97th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
8 news outlets
blogs
8 blogs
policy
1 policy source
twitter
204 tweeters
facebook
4 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page
googleplus
1 Google+ user
q&a
2 Q&A threads

Citations

dimensions_citation
384 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
254 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 head and facial injuries in bicyclists
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 1999
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd001855
Pubmed ID
Authors

Diane C Thompson, Fred Rivara, Robert Thompson

Abstract

Each year, in the United states, approximately 900 persons die from injuries due to bicycle crashes and over 500,000 persons are treated in emergency departments. Head injury is by far the greatest risk posed to bicyclists, comprising one-third of emergency department visits, two-thirds of hospital admissions, and three-fourths of deaths. Facial injuries to cyclists occur at a rate nearly identical to that of head injuries. Although it makes inherent sense that helmets would be protective against head injury, establishing the real-world effectiveness of helmets is important. A number of case-control studies have been conducted demonstrating the effectiveness of bicycle helmets. Because of the magnitude of the problem and the potential effectiveness of bicycle helmets, the objective of this review is to determine whether bicycle helmets reduce head, brain and facial injury for bicyclists of all ages involved in a bicycle crash or fall.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 204 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 254 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 254 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Professor 1 <1%
Student > Bachelor 1 <1%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 <1%
Unknown 251 99%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 2 <1%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 <1%
Unknown 251 99%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 292. 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 17 August 2019.
All research outputs
#40,261
of 13,407,302 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#78
of 10,585 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#154
of 86,413 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#1
of 35 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,407,302 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 10,585 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.9. 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 86,413 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 35 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 97% of its contemporaries.