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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
The PRESLO study: evaluation of a global secondary low back pain prevention program for health care personnel in a hospital setting. Multicenter, randomized intervention trial
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, November 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2474-13-234 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Angélique Denis, Amélie Zelmar, Marie-Annick Le Pogam, Emmanuelle Chaleat-Valayer, Alain Bergeret, Cyrille Colin |
| Abstract |
Common low back pain represents a major public health problem in terms of its direct cost to health care and its socio-economic repercussions. Ten percent of individuals who suffer from low back pain evolve toward a chronic case and as such are responsible for 75 to 80% of the direct cost of low back pain. It is therefore imperative to highlight the predictive factors of low back pain chronification in order to lighten the economic burden of low back pain-related invalidity. Despite being particularly affected by low back pain, Hospices Civils de Lyon (HCL) personnel have never been offered a specific, tailor-made treatment plan. The PRESLO study (with PRESLO referring to Secondary Low Back Pain Prevention, or in French, PREvention Secondaire de la LOmbalgie), proposed by HCL occupational health services and the Centre Médico-Chirurgical et de Réadaptation des Massues - Croix Rouge Française, is a randomized trial that aims to evaluate the feasibility and efficiency of a global secondary low back pain prevention program for the low back pain sufferers among HCL hospital personnel, a population at risk for recurrence and chronification. This program, which is based on the concept of physical retraining, employs a multidisciplinary approach uniting physical activity, cognitive education about low back pain and lumbopelvic morphotype analysis. No study targeting populations at risk for low back pain chronification has as yet evaluated the efficiency of lighter secondary prevention programs. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 231 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| Switzerland | 1 | <1% |
| Indonesia | 1 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 226 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 42 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 29 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 23 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 22 | 10% |
| Researcher | 22 | 10% |
| Other | 30 | 13% |
| Unknown | 63 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 55 | 24% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 46 | 20% |
| Sports and Recreations | 13 | 6% |
| Psychology | 10 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 8 | 3% |
| Other | 25 | 11% |
| Unknown | 74 | 32% |
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 30 November 2012.
All research outputs
#20,174,175
of 22,687,320 outputs
Outputs from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#3,611
of 4,028 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#245,745
of 277,168 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#70
of 87 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,687,320 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 277,168 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 87 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.