↓ Skip to main content

Moxibustion for cephalic version: a feasibility randomised controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies, September 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
92 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
Moxibustion for cephalic version: a feasibility randomised controlled trial
Published in
BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies, September 2011
DOI 10.1186/1472-6882-11-81
Pubmed ID
Authors

Carole K Do, Caroline A Smith, Hannah Dahlen, Andrew Bisits, Virginia Schmied

Abstract

Moxibustion (a type of Chinese medicine which involves burning a herb close to the skin) has been used to correct a breech presentation. Evidence of effectiveness and safety from systematic reviews is encouraging although significant heterogeneity has been found among trials. We assessed the feasibility of conducting a randomised controlled trial of moxibustion plus usual care compared with usual care to promote cephalic version in women with a breech presentation, and examined the views of women and health care providers towards implementing a trial within an Australian context.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 92 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Spain 1 1%
Peru 1 1%
Unknown 89 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 21 23%
Researcher 9 10%
Student > Bachelor 9 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 7%
Student > Postgraduate 5 5%
Other 19 21%
Unknown 23 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 44 48%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 13%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 3%
Unspecified 3 3%
Psychology 2 2%
Other 4 4%
Unknown 24 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 21 July 2012.
All research outputs
#13,367,200
of 23,063,209 outputs
Outputs from BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies
#1,460
of 3,652 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#82,386
of 132,098 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies
#31
of 45 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,063,209 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,652 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% 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 132,098 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 45 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.