↓ Skip to main content

Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) providers’ views of chronic low back pain patients’ expectations of CAM therapies: a qualitative study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine, November 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (79th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
115 Mendeley
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.
Title
Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) providers’ views of chronic low back pain patients’ expectations of CAM therapies: a qualitative study
Published in
BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine, November 2012
DOI 10.1186/1472-6882-12-234
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lisa M Schafer, Clarissa Hsu, Emery Rose Eaves, Cheryl Ritenbaugh, Judith Turner, Daniel C Cherkin, Colette Sims, Karen J Sherman

Abstract

Some researchers think that patients with higher expectations for CAM therapies experience better outcomes and that enthusiastic providers can enhance treatment outcomes. This is in contrast to evidence suggesting conventional medical providers often reorient patient expectations to better match what providers believe to be realistic. However, there is a paucity of research on CAM providers' views of their patients' expectations regarding CAM therapy and the role of these expectations in patient outcomes.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 115 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 2%
Australia 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 110 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 21 18%
Student > Bachelor 16 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 10%
Other 8 7%
Other 29 25%
Unknown 16 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 49 43%
Nursing and Health Professions 19 17%
Social Sciences 12 10%
Psychology 8 7%
Sports and Recreations 4 3%
Other 9 8%
Unknown 14 12%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 29 May 2013.
All research outputs
#1,984,078
of 10,307,691 outputs
Outputs from BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine
#482
of 2,329 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#61,143
of 304,140 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine
#18
of 95 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 10,307,691 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,329 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% 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 304,140 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 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 95 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.