↓ Skip to main content

Image-guided versus blind glucocorticoid injection for shoulder pain

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, August 2012
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 (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
93 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
216 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
Image-guided versus blind glucocorticoid injection for shoulder pain
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, August 2012
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd009147.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jason E Bloom, Adam Rischin, Renea V Johnston, Rachelle Buchbinder

Abstract

Traditionally, glucocorticoid injection for the treatment of shoulder pain has been performed guided by anatomical landmarks alone. With the advent of readily available imaging tools such as ultrasound, image-guided injections have increasingly become accepted into routine care. While there is some evidence that the use of imaging improves accuracy, it is unclear from current evidence whether or not it improves patient-relevant outcomes.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 27 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 216 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 1%
Switzerland 2 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 210 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 46 21%
Researcher 31 14%
Student > Bachelor 28 13%
Other 22 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 9%
Other 45 21%
Unknown 25 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 120 56%
Nursing and Health Professions 37 17%
Psychology 8 4%
Social Sciences 3 1%
Computer Science 2 <1%
Other 13 6%
Unknown 33 15%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. 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 September 2020.
All research outputs
#1,136,168
of 16,502,694 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#3,055
of 11,518 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#8,243
of 134,661 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#16
of 110 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 16,502,694 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,518 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 24.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 134,661 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 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 110 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.