↓ Skip to main content

The BraveNet prospective observational study on integrative medicine treatment approaches for pain

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies, June 2013
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 (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (98th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
4 news outlets
twitter
19 X users
facebook
8 Facebook pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
151 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
The BraveNet prospective observational study on integrative medicine treatment approaches for pain
Published in
BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies, June 2013
DOI 10.1186/1472-6882-13-146
Pubmed ID
Authors

Donald I Abrams, Rowena Dolor, Rhonda Roberts, Constance Pechura, Jeffery Dusek, Sandi Amoils, Steven Amoils, Kevin Barrows, Joel S Edman, Joyce Frye, Erminia Guarneri, Ben Kligler, Daniel Monti, Myles Spar, Ruth Q Wolever

Abstract

Chronic pain affects nearly 116 million American adults at an estimated cost of up to $635 billion annually and is the No. 1 condition for which patients seek care at integrative medicine clinics. In our Study on Integrative Medicine Treatment Approaches for Pain (SIMTAP), we observed the impact of an integrative approach on chronic pain and a numberof other related patient-reported outcome measures.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 19 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 151 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Australia 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 149 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 31 21%
Researcher 21 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 13 9%
Student > Bachelor 11 7%
Other 25 17%
Unknown 32 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 47 31%
Nursing and Health Professions 16 11%
Psychology 13 9%
Neuroscience 6 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 3%
Other 23 15%
Unknown 41 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 46. 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 27 March 2015.
All research outputs
#870,737
of 24,835,287 outputs
Outputs from BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies
#125
of 3,889 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,849
of 201,816 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies
#3
of 101 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,835,287 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,889 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 201,816 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 101 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 98% of its contemporaries.