↓ Skip to main content

Complementary and alternative therapies for pain management in labour

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2006
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 (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
7 news outlets
policy
1 policy source
twitter
6 tweeters
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
168 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
325 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
Complementary and alternative therapies for pain management in labour
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2006
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd003521.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Caroline A Smith, Carmel T Collins, Allan M Cyna, Caroline A Crowther

Abstract

Many women would like to avoid pharmacological or invasive methods of pain management in labour and this may contribute towards the popularity of complementary methods of pain management. This review examined currently available evidence supporting the use of alternative and complementary therapies for pain management in labour.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 4 1%
United Kingdom 3 <1%
Canada 3 <1%
Switzerland 2 <1%
Ireland 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Unknown 310 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 62 19%
Student > Bachelor 48 15%
Unspecified 45 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 38 12%
Researcher 35 11%
Other 97 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 134 41%
Unspecified 54 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 52 16%
Psychology 26 8%
Social Sciences 20 6%
Other 39 12%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 66. 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 25 April 2018.
All research outputs
#233,700
of 12,852,852 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#623
of 10,448 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,305
of 213,162 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#34
of 529 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,852,852 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,448 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 213,162 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 529 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 93% of its contemporaries.