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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
The Effectiveness of Physiotherapy and Complementary Therapies on Voice Disorders: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Medicine, April 2017
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fmed.2017.00045 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ricardo Cardoso, Rute F. Meneses, José Lumini-Oliveira |
| Abstract |
The treatment of voice disorders includes physiotherapy and complementary therapies. However, research to support these treatments is scarce. to verify the effectiveness of physiotherapy and complementary therapies on voice disorders. Research on electronic databases PubMed/Medline, SciELO, and LILACS was performed using the combination: voice AND (treatment OR intervention) according to PRISMA guidelines. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included in the review. Studies were analyzed using the physiotherapy evidence database (PEDro) scale and the Center for Evidence-Based Medicine's Levels of Evidence scale. Eight papers met the inclusion criteria. From the RCTs included in this review, six assessed massage, one transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS), one refer to spinal manipulative therapy, and one to acupuncture. The literature regarding the effectiveness of physiotherapy and complementary therapies was good in both quality and results, indicating that massage, TENS, and acupuncture seem to be effective treatments to reduce voice complaints and improve voice quality, supporting the inclusion of complementary therapies but mostly physiotherapy interventions in the treatment of patients with voice disorders. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 29% |
| Japan | 1 | 14% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 14% |
| Unknown | 3 | 43% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 71% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 14% |
| Scientists | 1 | 14% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 75 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 75 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 6 | 8% |
| Other | 12 | 16% |
| Unknown | 25 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 16 | 21% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 10 | 13% |
| Arts and Humanities | 3 | 4% |
| Psychology | 3 | 4% |
| Neuroscience | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 10 | 13% |
| Unknown | 31 | 41% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 07 December 2023.
All research outputs
#7,068,530
of 23,283,373 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Medicine
#1,657
of 5,961 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#110,227
of 310,516 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Medicine
#9
of 40 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,283,373 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,961 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% 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 310,516 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 40 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.