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 |
Assessing function in patients undergoing joint replacement: a study protocol for a cohort study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, November 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2474-13-220 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Vikki Wylde, Ashley W Blom, Stijn Bolink, Luke Brunton, Paul Dieppe, Rachael Gooberman-Hill, Bernd Grimm, Cindy Mann, Erik Lenguerrand |
| Abstract |
Joint replacement is an effective intervention for people with advanced arthritis, although there is an important minority of patients who do not improve post-operatively. There is a need for robust evidence on outcomes after surgery, but there are a number of measures that assess function after joint replacement, many of which lack any clear theoretical basis. The World Health Organisation has introduced the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF), which divides function into three separate domains: Impairment, activity limitations and participation restrictions. The aim of this study is to compare the properties and responsiveness of a selection of commonly used outcome tools that assess function, examine how well they relate to the ICF concepts, and to explore the changes in the measures over time. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 77 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 76 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 18 | 23% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 10% |
| Other | 7 | 9% |
| Researcher | 7 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 6 | 8% |
| Other | 15 | 19% |
| Unknown | 16 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 26 | 34% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 11 | 14% |
| Engineering | 7 | 9% |
| Sports and Recreations | 3 | 4% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 12 | 16% |
| Unknown | 16 | 21% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 26 November 2012.
All research outputs
#14,737,988
of 22,685,926 outputs
Outputs from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#2,285
of 4,028 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#108,786
of 179,099 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#41
of 69 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,685,926 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% 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 179,099 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 69 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.