cochrane database of systematic reviews

Trusted evidence. Informed decisions. Better health.

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2016 Impact Factor and Usage report

CDSR 2016 Impact Factor and Usage report 2

1. The Impact Factor of the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

(CDSR) Each year in June, Clarivate Analytics publish the Impact Factors of all journals indexed in the Journal Citation Report.

The 2016 Impact Factor for CDSR is 6.264, which describes the ratio of the number of reviews published during 2014 and 2015 (1,839) to the number of citations these reviews received in 2015 (11,520).

A review published in the CDSR in 2014 or 2015 was cited, on average, 6.264 times in 2016.

When considering the citation data presented below, please be aware of the following:

• The data used to generate Impact Factors for individual Cochrane Review Groups (CRG) was extracted from Clarivate Analytics Web of Science. This is slightly different from the data used to calculate the Impact Factor of the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR). All journal Impact Factors (including the Impact Factor of the CDSR) are published in the Journal Citation Reports (JCR). The data used to calculate journal Impact Factors are not made publically available. Individual CRG Impact Factor data, therefore, should not be quoted as ‘official’, but can be used within the organisation.

• Cites for individual Cochrane Reviews and individual CRG Impact Factors are allocated by a process of hand-matching. Each year a proportion of cites cannot be matched to citable items because the cited work is not cited correctly. For example, a common error when citing Cochrane Reviews is to omit the version number or suffix from the DOI. The accuracy of the source data provided by Clarivate Analytics also has an impact on the success rate of the citation matching. The table below shows the percentage of cites that were successfully hand-matched for the past five Impact Factor reports. This report has an 86% success rate which means the majority of Groups will receive a higher CRG Impact Factor than last year.

Impact Factor Year Cites received*

Cites successfully

matched

% of successfully

matched cites

2016 11,520 9,885 86%

2015 11,522 9,397 82%

2014 11,932 11,720 98%

2013 9,859 8,515 86%

2012 8,087 6,411 79%

2011 7,721 6,685 87%

*Source – Journal Citation Reports

• All reviews that have a new citation record (excluding withdrawn reviews) are included in the CDSR Impact Factor calculation.


The ten most cited reviews published in the CDSR (all CRGs), that contributed to the 2016 Impact Factor were:

Times Cited Title Authors CD Number Review Group

215 Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions

Stacey D, Légaré F, Col NF, Bennett CL, Barry MJ, Eden KB, Holmes-Rovner M, Llewellyn-Thomas H, Lyddiatt A, Thomson R, Trevena L, Wu JHC

CD001431.pub4 Consumers and Communication Group

107 Interventions for enhancing medication adherence

Nieuwlaat R, Wilczynski N, Navarro T, Hobson N, Jeffery R, Keepanasseril A, Agoritsas T, Mistry N, Iorio A, Jack S, Sivaramalingam B, Iserman E, Mustafa RA, Jedraszewski D, Cotoi C, Haynes RB

CD000011.pub4 Consumers and Communication Group

103 Electronic cigarettes for smoking cessation McRobbie H, Bullen C, Hartmann-Boyce J, Hajek P CD010216.pub2 Tobacco Addiction Group

95 Surgery for weight loss in adults Colquitt JL, Pickett K, Loveman E, Frampton GK CD003641.pub4 Metabolic and Endocrine Disorders Group

82 Buprenorphine maintenance versus placebo or methadone maintenance for opioid dependence

Mattick RP, Breen C, Kimber J, Davoli M CD002207.pub4 Drugs and Alcohol Group

65 Xpert® MTB/RIF assay for pulmonary tuberculosis and rifampicin resistance in adults

Steingart KR, Schiller I, Horne DJ, Pai M, Boehme CC, Dendukuri N CD009593.pub3 Infectious Diseases Group

64 Pulmonary rehabilitation for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

McCarthy B, Casey D, Devane D, Murphy K, Murphy E, Lacasse Y

CD003793.pub3 Airways Group

54 Vitamin D supplementation for prevention of mortality in adults

Bjelakovic G, Gluud LL, Nikolova D, Whitfield K, Wetterslev J, Simonetti RG, Bjelakovic M, Gluud C CD008965.pub4

Metabolic and Endocrine Disorders Group

54 Neuraminidase inhibitors for preventing and treating influenza in adults and children

Jefferson T, Jones MA, Doshi P, Del Mar CB, Hama R, Thompson MJ, Spencer EA, Onakpoya I, Mahtani KR, Nunan D, Howick J, Heneghan CJ

CD002990.pub3 Acute Respiratory Infections Group

54 Self management for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Zwerink M, Brusse-Keizer M, van der Valk PDLPM, Zielhuis GA, Monninkhof EM, van der Palen J, Frith PA, Effing T

CD007470.pub3 Airways Group


CDSR is ranked 14 of 154 journals in the ‘Medicine, General and Internal’ category, placing it in the top five percent of all titles listed in the Journal Citation Report:

2016 Rank Journal name Impact

Factor

No. of citable items

No. of Reviews

published

5-Year Impact Factor

% Reviews uncited*

Self-citation

rate

IF w/o self-citations

1 NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE 72.406 328 90 64.201 0% 1% 71.699

2 LANCET 47.831 337 49 48.082 0% 3% 46.466

3 JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION 44.405 213 70 38.209 0% 2% 43.313

4 BMJ-British Medical Journal 20.785 196 146 19.355 1% 7% 19.387

5 ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE 17.202 136 84 17.637 0% 4% 16.571

6 JAMA Internal Medicine 16.538 127 17 16.337 0% 4% 15.924

7 PLOS MEDICINE 11.862 189 18 14.952 0% 2% 11.622

8 Journal of Cachexia Sarcopenia and Muscle 9.697 52 17 7.894 0% 23% 7.439

9 BMC Medicine 8.097 175 58 8.836 3% 2% 7.955

10 JOURNAL OF INTERNAL MEDICINE 7.98 92 75 6.953 0% 2% 7.844

11 CANADIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION JOURNAL 6.784 87 44 6.908 5% 6% 6.399

12 MAYO CLINIC PROCEEDINGS 6.686 139 55 7.281 0% 6% 6.272

13 Nature Reviews Disease Primers 6.389 37 0 6.389 0% 3% 6.222

14 Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 6.264 815 1838 7.084 15% 5% 5.931

*Retrieved October 3rd, 2017

Ranking: The 2016 CDSR Impact Factor of 6.264 is an improvement on the previous years Impact Factor of 6.103. CDSR has dropped two places in the ranking from 12th to 14th. The Impact Factor of the Mayo Clinic Proceedings rose from 5.920 to 6.686, the journal jumped one place above the CDSR in the ranking. Nature Reviews Disease Primers is a new entry in 2016 with an Impact Factor of 6.389, putting it one place above the CDSR.

Citable Items: The table above shows that the CDSR published a much higher number of citable items in this Impact Factor year compared to the other high ranking journals in the category. On average, 162 citable items were published by the other journals ranked higher than the CDSR, compared with 815 citable items published within the CDSR.

Uncited items: 15% of Cochrane Reviews were not cited in this Impact Factor window compared with 21% in the previous window.


The 5-Year Impact Factor was 7.084. This is calculated by taking the number of cites in 2016 to items published between 2011 and 2015 (31,954) and dividing this by the number of items published between 2011 and 2015 (4,511). In the 2016 Impact Factor window, only the top 4 ranked titles (NEJM, Lancet, JAMA, BMJ) received more cites than the CDSR.

Year Ranking Impact Factor

In-Window

Cites

Citable items

Total Cites

Self-citation

rate

IF w/o self-

citations

5-Year Impact Factor

2016 14 6.264 11,520 1,839 57,740 5% 5.931 7.084

2015 12 6.103 11,522 1,888 47,899 5% 5.748 6.665

2014 13 6.035 11,932 1,977 43,592 5% 5.693 6.539

2013 10 5.939 9,859 1,660 39,856 8% 5.433 6.706

2012 12 5.785 8,087 1,398 34,230 8% 5.288 6.553

2011 10 5.912 7,721 1,306 29,593 5% 5.630 6.309

2010 10 6.186 6,978 1,128 27,366 7% 5.784 6.346

2009 11 5.653 6,574 1,163 23,102 6% 5.305 -

The number of reviews published in the CDSR in 2015 was 6% higher than in 2014 (950 v 889). The CDSR published the third highest number of citable items of the journals in the Medicine, General & Internal category in calendar year 2015. The top 5 journals in terms of number of citable items published in 2016 were:

Journal Title No. of items published in 2015

Impact Factor 2015

Impact Factor rank in category

MEDICINE 3,275 1.803 58 BMJ Open 1,998 2.369 38 Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 815 6.124 14 INTERNAL MEDICINE 588 0.815 109 CHINESE MEDICAL JOURNAL 411 1.064 96

2. The Impact Factors of individual Cochrane Review Groups (CRGs): Figure 1 shows the 2016 CRG Impact Factors for each CRG. Figure 2 shows the number of publications and citations contributing to the 2016 Impact Factors for each CRG as a percentage of the CDSR. It is important to remember that these figures have been calculated using hand-matched data from Web of Science and are not ‘official’ Impact Factors.


Figure 1: ‘Impact Factor’ for each CRG (i.e. number of cites in 2016 to reviews published in 2014–2015, divided by the number of reviews published in 2014–2015)

0.000

5.000

10.000

15.000

20.000

25.000

30.000

35.000Co

nsum

ers a

nd C

omm

unic

atio

n Gr

oup

Toba

cco

Addi

ctio

n Gr

oup

Met

hodo

logy

Rev

iew

Gro

upM

etab

olic

and

End

ocrin

e Di

sord

ers G

roup

Colo

rect

al C

ance

r Gro

upDr

ugs a

nd A

lcoh

ol G

roup

Infe

ctio

us D

isea

ses G

roup

Uro

logy

Gro

upSt

roke

Gro

upDe

men

tia a

nd C

ogni

tive

Impr

ovem

ent…

Airw

ays G

roup

Mus

culo

skel

etal

Gro

upEf

fect

ive

Prac

tice

and

Org

anis

atio

n of

…Ba

ck a

nd N

eck

Grou

pPu

blic

Hea

lth G

roup

Gyna

ecol

ogy

and

Fert

ility

Gro

upBr

east

Can

cer G

roup

Com

mon

Men

tal D

isor

ders

Gro

upH

eart

Gro

upAc

ute

Resp

irato

ry In

fect

ions

Gro

upM

ultip

le S

cler

osis

and

Rar

e Di

seas

es o

f…De

velo

pmen

tal,

Psyc

hoso

cial

and

…W

ork

Grou

pEN

T Gr

oup

Bone

, Joi

nt a

nd M

uscl

e Tr

aum

a Gr

oup

Neo

nata

l Gro

upAn

aest

hesi

a, C

ritic

al a

nd E

mer

genc

y Ca

re…

Neu

rom

uscu

lar G

roup

IBD

Grou

pH

IV/A

IDS

Grou

pIn

cont

inen

ce G

roup

Gyna

ecol

ogic

al, N

euro

-onc

olog

y an

d…Pr

egna

ncy

and

Child

birt

h Gr

oup

Kidn

ey a

nd T

rans

plan

t Gro

upU

pper

GI a

nd P

ancr

eatic

Dis

ease

s Gro

upH

yper

tens

ion

Grou

pEy

es a

nd V

isio

n Gr

oup

Skin

Gro

upLu

ng C

ance

r Gro

upFe

rtili

ty R

egul

atio

n Gr

oup

Pain

, Pal

liativ

e an

d Su

ppor

tive

Care

Gro

upST

I Gro

upVa

scul

ar G

roup

Ora

l Hea

lth G

roup

Inju

ries G

roup

Wou

nds G

roup

Epile

psy

Grou

pH

aem

atol

ogic

al M

alig

nanc

ies G

roup

Mov

emen

t Dis

orde

rs G

roup

Cyst

ic F

ibro

sis a

nd G

enet

ic D

isor

ders

Gro

upH

epat

o-Bi

liary

Gro

upSc

hizo

phre

nia

Grou

pCh

ildho

od C

ance

r Gro

up

2016 CDSR Impact Factor = 6.264


Figure 2: % Publications (blue) and % Citations (purple) of CDSR for each CRG (in order of percentage of publications)

0.0%

1.0%

2.0%

3.0%

4.0%

5.0%

6.0%

7.0%

8.0%

9.0%

10.0%Pr

egna

ncy

and

Child

birt

h Gr

oup

Cyst

ic F

ibro

sis a

nd G

enet

ic D

isor

ders

Gro

upAn

aest

hesi

a, C

ritic

al a

nd E

mer

genc

y Ca

re…

Pain

, Pal

liativ

e an

d Su

ppor

tive

Care

Gro

upAc

ute

Resp

irato

ry In

fect

ions

Gro

upEy

es a

nd V

isio

n Gr

oup

Hea

rt G

roup

Vasc

ular

Gro

upN

eona

tal G

roup

Wou

nds G

roup

Airw

ays G

roup

Gyna

ecol

ogic

al, N

euro

-onc

olog

y an

d…Gy

naec

olog

y an

d Fe

rtili

ty G

roup

Kidn

ey a

nd T

rans

plan

t Gro

upEp

ileps

y Gr

oup

Schi

zoph

reni

a Gr

oup

Mus

culo

skel

etal

Gro

upO

ral H

ealth

Gro

upSt

roke

Gro

upBo

ne, J

oint

and

Mus

cle

Trau

ma

Grou

pCo

mm

on M

enta

l Dis

orde

rs G

roup

Dem

entia

and

Cog

nitiv

e Im

prov

emen

t…H

epat

o-Bi

liary

Gro

upIn

jurie

s Gro

upN

euro

mus

cula

r Gro

upIn

fect

ious

Dis

ease

s Gro

upDe

velo

pmen

tal,

Psyc

hoso

cial

and

…Fe

rtili

ty R

egul

atio

n Gr

oup

Drug

s and

Alc

ohol

Gro

upEf

fect

ive

Prac

tice

and

Org

anis

atio

n of

…U

pper

GI a

nd P

ancr

eatic

Dis

ease

s Gro

upIB

D Gr

oup

ENT

Grou

pH

aem

atol

ogic

al M

alig

nanc

ies G

roup

Inco

ntin

ence

Gro

upCh

ildho

od C

ance

r Gro

upSk

in G

roup

Toba

cco

Addi

ctio

n Gr

oup

Met

abol

ic a

nd E

ndoc

rine

Diso

rder

s Gro

upW

ork

Grou

pBa

ck a

nd N

eck

Grou

pCo

nsum

ers a

nd C

omm

unic

atio

n Gr

oup

Hyp

erte

nsio

n Gr

oup

HIV

/AID

S Gr

oup

Lung

Can

cer G

roup

Mul

tiple

Scl

eros

is a

nd R

are

Dise

ases

of…

Brea

st C

ance

r Gro

upCo

lore

ctal

Can

cer G

roup

Mov

emen

t Dis

orde

rs G

roup

Uro

logy

Gro

upM

etho

dolo

gy R

evie

w G

roup

Publ

ic H

ealth

Gro

upST

I Gro

up

% Publications % Citations


3. How the citation data compare to Wiley Online Library usage data:

When considering the usage data presented below, please be aware of the following:

• A proportion of full text downloads cannot be associated with an individual Cochrane Review so the usage data included in this report is an underestimate of overall usage activity.

• Only usage activity related to Cochrane Systematic Reviews hosted on the Wiley Online Library platform is included in this report. The report does not include usage activity related to Cochrane Systematic Reviews hosted on third-party platforms.

The ten most accessed Cochrane Systematic Reviews in 2016 were:

Review Title Full text downloads CD Number Publication date CRG

Interventions for preventing obesity in children 15,119 CD001871.pub3 Dec-11 Public Health Group

Interventions for preventing falls in older people living in the community

15,101 CD007146.pub3 Sep-12 Bone, Joint and Muscle Trauma Group

Exercise for depression 14,253 CD004366.pub6 Sep-13 Common Mental Disorders Group

Early skin-to-skin contact for mothers and their healthy newborn infants 13,216 CD003519.pub3 May-12 Pregnancy and Childbirth Group

Effectiveness of different nursing handover styles for ensuring continuity of information in hospitalised patients

11,574 CD009979.pub2 Jun-14 Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group

Honey as a topical treatment for wounds 11,342 CD005083.pub4 Mar-15 Wounds Group

Pulmonary rehabilitation for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease 11,097 CD003793.pub3 Feb-15 Airways Group


4. Usage of individual Cochrane Review Groups (CRGs): Figure 3 shows the average number of full text downloads per review as accessed via Wiley Online Library during 2016 (regardless of publication date). Figure 4 shows the number of publications and full text downloads for each CRG as a percentage of the CDSR.

Interprofessional education: effects on professional practice and healthcare outcomes (update) 10,972 CD002213.pub3 Mar-13 Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group

Interventions for enhancing medication adherence 10,955 CD000011.pub4 Nov-14 Consumers and Communication Group

Cranberries for preventing urinary tract infections 10,775 CD001321.pub5 Oct-12 Kidney and Transplant Group


Figure 3: Average number of full-text downloads received by Cochrane Review Groups in 2016

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900Pu

blic

Hea

lth G

roup

Effe

ctiv

e Pr

actic

e an

d O

rgan

isat

ion

of…

Wou

nds G

roup

Colo

rect

al C

ance

r Gro

upCo

nsum

ers a

nd C

omm

unic

atio

n Gr

oup

Back

and

Nec

k Gr

oup

Toba

cco

Addi

ctio

n Gr

oup

Wor

k Gr

oup

Com

mon

Men

tal D

isor

ders

Gro

upDe

men

tia a

nd C

ogni

tive

Impr

ovem

ent…

Preg

nanc

y an

d Ch

ildbi

rth

Grou

pBo

ne, J

oint

and

Mus

cle

Trau

ma

Grou

pM

uscu

losk

elet

al G

roup

Met

abol

ic a

nd E

ndoc

rine

Diso

rder

s Gro

upO

ral H

ealth

Gro

upDe

velo

pmen

tal,

Psyc

hoso

cial

and

…St

roke

Gro

upAn

aest

hesi

a, C

ritic

al a

nd E

mer

genc

y…Pa

in, P

allia

tive

and

Supp

ortiv

e Ca

re G

roup

Acut

e Re

spira

tory

Infe

ctio

ns G

roup

Hea

rt G

roup

Brea

st C

ance

r Gro

upSk

in G

roup

Inco

ntin

ence

Gro

upDr

ugs a

nd A

lcoh

ol G

roup

Airw

ays G

roup

Mul

tiple

Scl

eros

is a

nd R

are

Dise

ases

of…

Inju

ries G

roup

Hyp

erte

nsio

n Gr

oup

Vasc

ular

Gro

upIn

fect

ious

Dis

ease

s Gro

upM

etho

dolo

gy R

evie

w G

roup

Kidn

ey a

nd T

rans

plan

t Gro

upM

ovem

ent D

isor

ders

Gro

upGy

naec

olog

y an

d Fe

rtili

ty G

roup

STI G

roup

Lung

Can

cer G

roup

Neo

nata

l Gro

upIB

D Gr

oup

Neu

rom

uscu

lar G

roup

Schi

zoph

reni

a Gr

oup

Gyna

ecol

ogic

al, N

euro

-onc

olog

y an

d…U

pper

GI a

nd P

ancr

eatic

Dis

ease

s Gro

upFe

rtili

ty R

egul

atio

n Gr

oup

ENT

Grou

pU

rolo

gy G

roup

Epile

psy

Grou

pCh

ildho

od C

ance

r Gro

upCy

stic

Fib

rosi

s and

Gen

etic

Dis

orde

rs…

Eyes

and

Vis

ion

Grou

pH

IV/A

IDS

Grou

pH

aem

atol

ogic

al M

alig

nanc

ies G

roup

Hep

ato-

Bilia

ry G

roup


Figure 4: % Publications (blue) and % Full Text Downloads (purple) of CDSR for each CRG (in order of percentage of publications)

0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

10.0%

12.0%Pr

egna

ncy

and

Child

birt

h Gr

oup

Neo

nata

l Gro

upAi

rway

s Gro

upPa

in, P

allia

tive

and

Supp

ortiv

e Ca

re G

roup

Gyna

ecol

ogy

and

Fert

ility

Gro

upAc

ute

Resp

irato

ry In

fect

ions

Gro

upAn

aest

hesi

a, C

ritic

al a

nd E

mer

genc

y Ca

re…

Hep

ato-

Bilia

ry G

roup

Ora

l Hea

lth G

roup

Schi

zoph

reni

a Gr

oup

Cyst

ic F

ibro

sis a

nd G

enet

ic D

isor

ders

Gro

upH

eart

Gro

upEy

es a

nd V

isio

n Gr

oup

Gyna

ecol

ogic

al, N

euro

-onc

olog

y an

d…M

uscu

losk

elet

al G

roup

Kidn

ey a

nd T

rans

plan

t Gro

upSt

roke

Gro

upCh

ildho

od C

ance

r Gro

upDe

velo

pmen

tal,

Psyc

hoso

cial

and

Lea

rnin

g…Va

scul

ar G

roup

Wou

nds G

roup

Com

mon

Men

tal D

isor

ders

Gro

upBo

ne, J

oint

and

Mus

cle

Trau

ma

Grou

pN

euro

mus

cula

r Gro

upIn

fect

ious

Dis

ease

s Gro

upEN

T Gr

oup

Inju

ries G

roup

Met

abol

ic a

nd E

ndoc

rine

Diso

rder

s Gro

upEf

fect

ive

Prac

tice

and

Org

anis

atio

n of

Car

e…De

men

tia a

nd C

ogni

tive

Impr

ovem

ent G

roup

Upp

er G

I and

Pan

crea

tic D

isea

ses G

roup

Epile

psy

Grou

pDr

ugs a

nd A

lcoh

ol G

roup

HIV

/AID

S Gr

oup

Skin

Gro

upFe

rtili

ty R

egul

atio

n Gr

oup

IBD

Grou

pIn

cont

inen

ce G

roup

Toba

cco

Addi

ctio

n Gr

oup

Back

and

Nec

k Gr

oup

Hae

mat

olog

ical

Mal

igna

ncie

s Gro

upBr

east

Can

cer G

roup

Hyp

erte

nsio

n Gr

oup

Colo

rect

al C

ance

r Gro

upCo

nsum

ers a

nd C

omm

unic

atio

n Gr

oup

Mov

emen

t Dis

orde

rs G

roup

Uro

logy

Gro

upM

ultip

le S

cler

osis

and

Rar

e Di

seas

es o

f the

…Lu

ng C

ance

r Gro

upM

etho

dolo

gy R

evie

w G

roup

Wor

k Gr

oup

Publ

ic H

ealth

Gro

upST

I Gro

up

% Publications


5. Alternative metrics Using the Altmetric system (http://www.altmetric.com/), we are able to report on further measures of the impact of Cochrane Reviews beyond cites and usage. Altmetric have created a cluster of servers that watch social media sites, newspapers, government policy documents and other sources for mentions of scholarly articles. The Altmetric Attention Score is a quantitative measure of the attention that a scholarly article has received. It is derived from three main Factors:

Volume - The score for an article rises as more people mention it. Sources - Each category of mention contributes a different base amount to the final score (further information including a breakdown of sources can be found here). Authors - How often the author of each mention talks about scholarly articles influences the contribution of the mention.

The unique Altmetric Attention Score is available on the abstract page of every Cochrane Review that has achieved a score of one or above.

Altmetric has tracked mentions of 8,572 articles from the CDSR up to August 2017.

The highest Altmetric Attention Scores from Cochrane Reviews published in 2016 (scores retrieved 30th August 2017) were:

http://www.altmetric.com/

https://help.altmetric.com/support/solutions/articles/6000060969-how-is-the-altmetric-attention-score-calculated-


B=Bloggers T=Tweeters G+=Google+ Authors N=News outlets F=Facebook walls W=Wikipedia pages M=Mendeley readers

Altmetric Score Review Title B T G+ N F W M

1010 Workplace interventions for reducing sitting at work 12 457 5 94 15 5 315

765 Vitamin D for the management of asthma 12 175 2 86 43 1 27

584 Electronic cigarettes for smoking cessation 7 188 1 61 14 3 50

478 Breastfeeding for procedural pain in infants beyond the neonatal period 0 667 0 12 42 1 30

472 Motor control exercise for chronic non-specific low-back pain. 5 551 6 26 43 0 86

455 Paracetamol for low back pain 5 525 5 14 57 1 61

350 Legislative smoking bans for reducing harms from second-hand smoke exposure, smoking prevalence and tobacco consumption 6 193 1 24 7 2 113

347 Non-medical prescribing versus medical prescribing for acute and chronic disease management in primary and secondary care 2 487 0 3 11 0 46

289 Yoga for asthma 4 163 1 40 18 1 72

238 Acupuncture for the prevention of episodic migraine 7 262 4 1 118 3 76


Altmetric track ‘mentions’ from 17 different sources including references in policy documents, citations in Wikipedia pages and discussions on Peer Review sites. Only sources that contributed substantially to the scores of the Cochrane Reviews in the table above have been included.

The Cochrane Review ranked first in the table above; ‘Workplace interventions for reducing sitting at work has the third-highest Altmetric Attention Score of all Cochrane Reviews. The article is in the top 5% of all research outputs tracked by Altmetric.

How different sources contribute to the Altmetric Attention Score can be clearly seen from examples in the table above. The Cochrane Review ranked second in the table above, ‘Vitamin D for the management of asthma’ received far fewer twitter mentions (175) compared to the average for the top 10 (367) but was mentioned in 86 news outlets (primarily in the US, the UK and Australia) which boosted its overall Altmetric score to 765. Conversely, the Cochrane Review ranked fourth in the table above; ‘Breastfeeding for procedural pain in infants beyond the neonatal period’ received the highest amount of attention on Twitter (667) but was covered by comparatively few news outlets (12). The Cochrane Review ranked seventh in the table above; ‘Legislative smoking bans for reducing harms from second-hand smoke exposure, smoking prevalence and tobacco consumption’, received 113 mentions on Mendeley. This number represents the number of Mendeley users that have added the article into their personal library.

cochrane database of systematic reviews

Documents