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.
Twitter Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Central mechanisms of real and sham electroacupuncture in the treatment of chronic low back pain: study protocol for a randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Trials, December 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13063-018-3044-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jiang-Ti Kong, Brandon MacIsaac, Ruti Cogan, Amanda Ng, Christine Sze Wan Law, Joseph Helms, Rosa Schnyer, Nicholas Vasilis Karayannis, Ming-Chih Kao, Lu Tian, Beth D. Darnall, James J. Gross, Sean Mackey, Rachel Manber |
Twitter Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 20% |
| Spain | 1 | 20% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 2 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 60% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 20% |
| Scientists | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 146 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 146 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 22 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 20 | 14% |
| Researcher | 11 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 7% |
| Other | 9 | 6% |
| Other | 25 | 17% |
| Unknown | 49 | 34% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 37 | 25% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 31 | 21% |
| Sports and Recreations | 7 | 5% |
| Neuroscience | 4 | 3% |
| Psychology | 3 | 2% |
| Other | 9 | 6% |
| Unknown | 55 | 38% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 May 2019.
All research outputs
#3,426,826
of 24,524,436 outputs
Outputs from Trials
#1,237
of 6,293 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#74,996
of 445,598 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Trials
#41
of 156 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,524,436 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,293 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% 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 445,598 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 156 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.