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 |
An investigation into the validity of cervical spine motion palpation using subjects with congenital block vertebrae as a 'gold standard'
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, June 2004
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2474-5-19 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Barry K Humphreys, Marianne Delahaye, Cynthia K Peterson |
| Abstract |
Although the effectiveness of manipulative therapy for treating back and neck pain has been demonstrated, the validity of many of the procedures used to detect joint dysfunction has not been confirmed. Practitioners of manual medicine frequently employ motion palpation as a diagnostic tool, despite conflicting evidence regarding its utility and reliability. The introduction of various spinal models with artificially introduced 'fixations' as an attempt to introduce a 'gold standard' has met with frustration and frequent mechanical failure. Because direct comparison against a 'gold standard' allows the validity, specificity and sensitivity of a test to be calculated, the identification of a realistic 'gold standard' against which motion palpation can be evaluated is essential. The objective of this study was to introduce a new, realistic, 'gold standard', the congenital block vertebra (CBV) to assess the validity of motion palpation in detecting a true fixation. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 22% |
| United States | 1 | 11% |
| Malta | 1 | 11% |
| Unknown | 5 | 56% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 8 | 89% |
| Scientists | 1 | 11% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 154 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 3 | 2% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Sweden | 1 | <1% |
| Belgium | 1 | <1% |
| Denmark | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 145 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 38 | 25% |
| Researcher | 16 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 15 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 15 | 10% |
| Other | 14 | 9% |
| Other | 41 | 27% |
| Unknown | 15 | 10% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 85 | 55% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 13 | 8% |
| Sports and Recreations | 11 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 3% |
| Neuroscience | 5 | 3% |
| Other | 18 | 12% |
| Unknown | 17 | 11% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 20 September 2019.
All research outputs
#4,539,660
of 22,685,926 outputs
Outputs from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#916
of 4,028 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,161
of 54,408 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#3
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,685,926 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,028 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 54,408 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 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.