↓ Skip to main content

Neuromuscular electrical stimulation for muscle weakness in adults with advanced disease

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2013
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 (92nd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
20 tweeters
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
76 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
155 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
Neuromuscular electrical stimulation for muscle weakness in adults with advanced disease
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2013
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd009419.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Maddocks M, Gao W, Higginson IJ, Wilcock A, Maddocks, Matthew, Gao, Wei, Higginson, Irene J, Wilcock, Andrew

Abstract

Patients with progressive diseases often experience muscle weakness, which impacts adversely on levels of independence and quality of life. In those who are unable or unwilling to undertake traditional forms of exercise, neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) may provide an alternative method of enhancing leg muscle strength. Programmes appear to be well tolerated and have led to improvements in muscle function, exercise capacity and quality of life. However, estimates regarding the effectiveness of NMES from individual studies lack power and precision.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 20 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 155 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Portugal 2 1%
Austria 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 149 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 28 18%
Student > Master 24 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 13%
Student > Postgraduate 16 10%
Researcher 14 9%
Other 37 24%
Unknown 16 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 69 45%
Nursing and Health Professions 30 19%
Sports and Recreations 13 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 3%
Engineering 4 3%
Other 15 10%
Unknown 20 13%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 02 June 2017.
All research outputs
#1,323,433
of 14,258,361 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#3,775
of 10,927 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#16,244
of 207,003 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#185
of 490 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,258,361 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,927 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% 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 207,003 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 490 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its contemporaries.