↓ Skip to main content

Waiting for total knee replacement surgery: factors associated with pain, stiffness, function and quality of life

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, May 2009
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
62 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
184 Mendeley
connotea
1 Connotea
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
Waiting for total knee replacement surgery: factors associated with pain, stiffness, function and quality of life
Published in
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, May 2009
DOI 10.1186/1471-2474-10-52
Pubmed ID
Authors

François Desmeules, Clermont E Dionne, Étienne Belzile, Renée Bourbonnais, Pierre Frémont

Abstract

Recent evidences show that education and rehabilitation while waiting for knee replacement have positive effects on the patients' health status. Identification of factors associated with worse pain, function and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) while waiting for surgery could help develop pre-surgery rehabilitation interventions that target specifically these factors and prioritize patients that may benefit the most from them. The objectives of this study were to measure pain, stiffness, function and HRQoL in patients at enrolment on waiting lists for knee replacement and to identify demographic, clinical, socioeconomic and psychosocial characteristics associated with these outcomes.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 184 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 3 2%
Norway 1 <1%
Chile 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 177 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 39 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 28 15%
Student > Bachelor 18 10%
Researcher 17 9%
Other 13 7%
Other 32 17%
Unknown 37 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 70 38%
Nursing and Health Professions 19 10%
Psychology 13 7%
Sports and Recreations 8 4%
Engineering 6 3%
Other 25 14%
Unknown 43 23%
Attention Score in Context

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 15 January 2013.
All research outputs
#15,261,106
of 22,693,205 outputs
Outputs from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#2,443
of 4,027 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#81,751
of 96,899 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#14
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,693,205 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,027 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 28th percentile – i.e., 28% 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 96,899 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.