↓ Skip to main content

Pelvic floor muscle training versus no treatment, or inactive control treatments, for urinary incontinence in women

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2018
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 (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
8 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
238 tweeters
facebook
10 Facebook pages
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
268 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
Pelvic floor muscle training versus no treatment, or inactive control treatments, for urinary incontinence in women
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2018
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd005654.pub4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Chantale Dumoulin, Licia P Cacciari, E Jean C Hay-Smith

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 238 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 268 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 267 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 60 22%
Student > Master 46 17%
Student > Bachelor 37 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 25 9%
Researcher 25 9%
Other 75 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 99 37%
Unspecified 71 26%
Nursing and Health Professions 53 20%
Social Sciences 9 3%
Sports and Recreations 8 3%
Other 28 10%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 242. 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 06 August 2019.
All research outputs
#50,934
of 13,385,815 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#100
of 10,576 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,043
of 265,508 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#1
of 116 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,385,815 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 10,576 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 265,508 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 116 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 99% of its contemporaries.