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 |
Manual therapies for cervicogenic headache: a systematic review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
The Journal of Headache and Pain, March 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10194-012-0436-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Aleksander Chaibi, Michael Bjørn Russell |
| Abstract |
This paper systematically reviewed randomized clinical trials (RCT) assessing the efficacy of manual therapies for cervicogenic headache (CEH). A total of seven RCTs were identified, i.e. one study applied physiotherapy ± temporomadibular mobilization techniques and six studies applied cervical spinal manipulative therapy (SMT). The RCTs suggest that physiotherapy and SMT might be an effective treatment in the management of CEH, but the results are difficult to evaluate, since only one study included a control group that did not receive treatment. Furthermore, the RCTs mostly included participant with infrequent CEH. Future challenges regarding CEH are substantial both from a diagnostic and management point of view. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 20% |
| Norway | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 3 | 60% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 80% |
| Scientists | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 460 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | <1% |
| Australia | 2 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 2 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Japan | 1 | <1% |
| Belgium | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 447 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 110 | 24% |
| Student > Bachelor | 59 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 45 | 10% |
| Other | 43 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 32 | 7% |
| Other | 86 | 19% |
| Unknown | 85 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 200 | 43% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 93 | 20% |
| Sports and Recreations | 16 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 14 | 3% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 10 | 2% |
| Other | 29 | 6% |
| Unknown | 98 | 21% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 02 March 2020.
All research outputs
#2,866,990
of 23,849,058 outputs
Outputs from The Journal of Headache and Pain
#329
of 1,417 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,930
of 162,869 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The Journal of Headache and Pain
#4
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,849,058 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,417 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% 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 162,869 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 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.