↓ Skip to main content

Lidocaine infusion for continuous interscalene nerve block: Is there evidence for local and systemic benefits?

Overview of attention for article published in Canadian Journal of Anesthesia, November 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
5 Mendeley
Title
Lidocaine infusion for continuous interscalene nerve block: Is there evidence for local and systemic benefits?
Published in
Canadian Journal of Anesthesia, November 2014
DOI 10.1007/s12630-014-0278-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Vivian H. Y. Ip, Ban C. H. Tsui

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 5 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 5 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Professor 1 20%
Student > Master 1 20%
Other 1 20%
Student > Postgraduate 1 20%
Unspecified 1 20%
Other 0 0%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 3 60%
Unspecified 2 40%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 April 2015.
All research outputs
#9,972,693
of 13,039,285 outputs
Outputs from Canadian Journal of Anesthesia
#1,309
of 1,623 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#180,918
of 294,075 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Canadian Journal of Anesthesia
#48
of 63 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,039,285 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,623 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 294,075 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 63 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.