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 |
Reproducibility of range of motion and muscle strength measurements in patients with hip osteoarthritis – an inter-rater study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, December 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2474-13-242 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Erik Poulsen, Henrik Wulff Christensen, Jeannette Østergaard Penny, Søren Overgaard, Werner Vach, Jan Hartvigsen |
| Abstract |
Assessment of range of motion (ROM) and muscle strength is fundamental in the clinical diagnosis of hip osteoarthritis (OA) but reproducibility of these measurements has mostly involved clinicians from secondary care and has rarely reported agreement parameters. Therefore, the primary objective of the study was to determine the inter-rater reproducibility of ROM and muscle strength measurements. Furthermore, the reliability of the overall assessment of clinical hip OA was evaluated. Reporting is in accordance with proposed guidelines for the reporting of reliability and agreement studies (GRRAS). |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 1 | 33% |
| Canada | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 144 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Chile | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Denmark | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Luxembourg | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 137 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 42 | 29% |
| Student > Bachelor | 18 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 14 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 11 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 8% |
| Other | 27 | 19% |
| Unknown | 21 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 57 | 40% |
| Sports and Recreations | 18 | 13% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 16 | 11% |
| Engineering | 7 | 5% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 4 | 3% |
| Other | 14 | 10% |
| Unknown | 28 | 19% |
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 13 June 2013.
All research outputs
#13,373,909
of 22,689,790 outputs
Outputs from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#1,901
of 4,028 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#156,847
of 278,002 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#46
of 96 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,689,790 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% 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 has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% 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 278,002 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 96 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.