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 |
Validation of the GALS musculoskeletal screening exam for use in primary care: a pilot study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, August 2008
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2474-9-115 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Karen A Beattie, Raja Bobba, Imaan Bayoumi, David Chan, Inge Schabort, Pauline Boulos, Walter Kean, Joyce Obeid, Ruth McCallum, George Ioannidis, Alexandra Papaioannou, Alfred Cividino |
| Abstract |
As the proportion of the Canadian population > or =65 grows, so too does the prevalence of musculoskeletal (MSK) conditions. Approximately 20% of visits to family physicians occur as a result of MSK complaints. The GALS (Gait, Arms, Legs, and Spine) screening examination was developed to assist in the detection of MSK abnormalities. Although MSK exams are primarily performed by rheumatologists or other MSK specialists, expanding their use in primary health care may improve the detection of MSK conditions allowing for earlier treatment. The primary goal of this study was to evaluate the use of the GALS locomotor screen in primary care by comparing the results of assessments of family physicians with those of rheumatologists. The secondary goal was to examine the incidence of MSK disorders and assess the frequency with which new diagnoses not previously documented in patients' charts were identified. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 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 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 4% |
| New Zealand | 1 | 2% |
| United States | 1 | 2% |
| Qatar | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 48 | 91% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 8 | 15% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 7 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 11% |
| Other | 5 | 9% |
| Researcher | 5 | 9% |
| Other | 9 | 17% |
| Unknown | 13 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 21 | 40% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 8% |
| Engineering | 2 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 6 | 11% |
| Unknown | 14 | 26% |
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 28 February 2013.
All research outputs
#18,331,227
of 22,699,621 outputs
Outputs from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#3,115
of 4,028 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#78,130
of 84,703 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#13
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,699,621 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% 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 10th percentile – i.e., 10% 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 84,703 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.