↓ Skip to main content

Surgical interruption of pelvic nerve pathways for primary and secondary dysmenorrhoea

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2005
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

f1000
1 research highlight platform

Citations

dimensions_citation
113 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
158 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
Surgical interruption of pelvic nerve pathways for primary and secondary dysmenorrhoea
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2005
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd001896.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michelle Proctor, Pallavi Latthe, Cindy Farquhar, Khalid Khan, Neil Johnson

Abstract

Dysmenorrhoea is the occurrence of painful menstrual cramps of uterine origin and is a very common gynaecological complaint with negative effect on a sufferer's quality of life. Medical therapy for dysmenorrhoea includes oral contraceptive pills (OCP) and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) which both act by suppressing prostaglandin levels. While these treatments are very successful there is still a 20 to 25% failure rate and surgery has been an option for such cases. Uterine nerve ablation (UNA) and presacral neurectomy (PSN) are two surgical treatments that have become increasingly utilised in recent years due to advances in laparoscopic procedures. These procedures both interrupt the majority of the cervical sensory pain nerve fibres. Observational studies have supported the use of these procedures for primary dysmenorrhoea. However, both operations only partially interrupt the cervical sensory nerve fibres in the pelvic area and, therefore, this type of surgery may not always benefit women with dysmenorrhoea.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 158 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 1%
Lithuania 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Poland 1 <1%
Unknown 151 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 25 16%
Student > Bachelor 23 15%
Researcher 22 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 10%
Other 11 7%
Other 32 20%
Unknown 29 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 85 54%
Nursing and Health Professions 17 11%
Psychology 8 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 1%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 1%
Other 11 7%
Unknown 33 21%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 June 2006.
All research outputs
#7,860,053
of 12,527,093 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#7,516
of 8,923 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#43,207
of 69,194 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#22
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,527,093 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,923 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.2. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 69,194 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.