↓ Skip to main content

The effectiveness of integrative medicine interventions on pain and anxiety in cardiovascular inpatients: a practice-based research evaluation

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine, December 2014
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 (91st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
6 tweeters
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
56 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 integrative medicine interventions on pain and anxiety in cardiovascular inpatients: a practice-based research evaluation
Published in
BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine, December 2014
DOI 10.1186/1472-6882-14-486
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jill R Johnson, Daniel J Crespin, Kristen H Griffin, Michael D Finch, Rachael L Rivard, Courtney J Baechler, Jeffery A Dusek

Abstract

Pain and anxiety occurring from cardiovascular disease are associated with long-term health risks. Integrative medicine (IM) therapies reduce pain and anxiety in small samples of hospitalized cardiovascular patients within randomized controlled trials; however, practice-based effectiveness research has been limited. The goal of the study is to evaluate the effectiveness of IM interventions (i.e., bodywork, mind-body and energy therapies, and traditional Chinese medicine) on pain and anxiety measures across a cardiovascular population.

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 56 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Unknown 55 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 20%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 16%
Student > Bachelor 8 14%
Researcher 6 11%
Student > Postgraduate 4 7%
Other 12 21%
Unknown 6 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 23 41%
Psychology 7 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 5%
Computer Science 1 2%
Other 7 13%
Unknown 9 16%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 04 September 2015.
All research outputs
#1,164,139
of 14,164,422 outputs
Outputs from BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine
#253
of 2,938 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#26,458
of 299,747 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine
#37
of 371 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,164,422 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,938 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 299,747 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 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 371 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 90% of its contemporaries.