↓ Skip to main content

Black cohosh (Cimicifuga spp.) for menopausal symptoms

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, September 2012
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 (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
blogs
3 blogs
twitter
15 tweeters
facebook
4 Facebook pages
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
85 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
22 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
Black cohosh (Cimicifuga spp.) for menopausal symptoms
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, September 2012
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd007244.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Leach MJ, Moore V, Leach, Matthew J, Moore, Vivienne, Matthew J Leach, Vivienne Moore

Abstract

Menopause can be a distressing and disruptive time for many women, with many experiencing hot flushes, night sweats, vaginal atrophy and dryness. Postmenopausal women are also at increased risk of osteoporosis. Interventions that decrease the severity and frequency of these menopausal symptoms are likely to improve a woman's well-being and quality of life. Hormone therapy has been shown to be effective in controlling the symptoms of menopause; however, many potentially serious adverse effects have been associated with this treatment. Evidence from experimental studies suggests that black cohosh may be a biologically plausible alternative treatment for menopause; even so, findings from studies investigating the clinical effectiveness of black cohosh have, to date, been inconsistent.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 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 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 22 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 6 27%
Student > Master 5 23%
Unspecified 3 14%
Other 2 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 9%
Other 4 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 41%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 14%
Unspecified 3 14%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 9%
Social Sciences 2 9%
Other 3 14%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 53. 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 08 June 2018.
All research outputs
#250,208
of 11,717,557 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#774
of 9,187 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,905
of 115,994 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#5
of 87 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,717,557 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,187 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.4. 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 115,994 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 87 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 94% of its contemporaries.